Okay, not literally. Probably not even close, but sad, nonetheless.
If you know even the littlest thing about me, you know that I LOVE music. I may even love music more than I love people. But I guess since people make music, there's no need to pick one (yet).
That means I take music pretty seriously. It's not just something in the background, or a casual hobby. Music is life - even though I don't make music, it's a huge part of who I am that it's important.
Someone said something to me recently that's been circulating through my brain recently, so much so that I felt compelled to blog about it. And it inspired that uplifting title! ;^) So, someone I know recently told me something to the effect that music has gone downhill or no great music has been made (or however it was phrased) since 1975. 1975!?!?!? Ummm, no. My initial response was "that's so sad." I was so shocked and disagreeable to that statement that I couldn't think of anything else to say. I sat there a few seconds pondering a follow up response ... annnnnnd nothing. So I just turned away and talked to someone else.
But I have more to say now.
I think part of the initial shock comes from the fact this person is an avid music fan. I haven't discussed their personal music preferences with them personally (we don't chat much), but they're known to be a big music lover too. And maybe the fact this person wasn't even born in 1975 caused some shock too.
I can see like maybe saying something like "painting hasn't been good since the last 1800's," because let's face it, people don't paint like they used to. And people have been painting legit art for hundreds of years. But the concept of popular music, in a form like we know it today, hasn't really existed all that long, especially if you look at the idea of specific artists belonging to specific songs. So basically, that's discounting like half of all popular music. HALF!
My first in private response was to compile a play list of all my music that was released in 2014 and play it all at once. This was the most opposite music I had of pre-1975 music. Nothing say "now rocks!" than a play list full of current music. And it was amazing. Granted, my taste in music is not the end all and be all of music. It's not for everyone, or many people, at least not my core genre preferences. I am not going to win any arguments with the general public about how music now is better than ever with my handful of pop-punk and metalcore albums that I bought this year (plus that one T. Swift album). But I still enjoyed it. A number of my fav bands released music in 2014. My favorite band of all time, New Found Glory, released their 8th full length album, and they are still rocking it out, redefining their sound. And although I can't believe it hasn't even been 1 year, but early 2014 is when I discovered Issues, and their self titled album was released. They guys are a music game changer.
My next instinct were to make mixes. I love making mixes and play lists; I have many to suit certain moods. I was thinking 1 that captured the amazingness of 2014, and then one to capture 1976-now of why music has gotten better since then, and has had some great standouts. But I don't think making and handing out mixes to people I'm not close to is the best option. Heck, I gave some of my work BFFs a fun mix I made, and I doubt even they have listened to it. (Oh, and by fun I mean loud and angry - it's a stress relief mix, aaaaaaaaaand it's epic).
But, I did begin to think of my arguments for why post-1975 is better than pre-1975. Just looking at my iTunes library is enough to say I don't agree w/ that. I have like 150 songs from pre-1975, and the rest of my 6,000+ are later. (And this is accurate as I made sure to verify and complete the year for each and every track in my library. I have problems). According to Wikipedia, Don't Fear the Reaper didn't even come out until 1976. That song is epic. More cowbell, please! And let's not forget the fact that many of Queen's awesomeness happened late '70's, early '80's.
Speaking of the '80's - yes, the fashion was terrible, and there were some so '80's moments that time should forget. But the music - the MUSIC! So much great music came from the '80's. A lot of rock really pushed the boundaries. Rap was just being invented (say what you will, even if you aren't a fan, early rap was beautiful art, saying what was said before in a new way). And there was so much fun pop music. Personally, for me, Journey is enough to say the '80's win at music. Other people have different tastes, but there was so much yummy goodness in the '80's.
And then there was the '90's. It was definitely a different decade for music. Grunge was really big. Nirvana was amazing. The '90's was when Mariah and Whitney were in their heyday. I thought about what I was listening to in the 1990's, as that was the 1st decade I was actually listening to popular music, and not just what my parents listened to, or Disney songs. Granted, I was REALLY into boy bands in the late '90's, they were awesome. Boy bands back then did so much more - they had intense synchronized dancing, they wore matching outfits, they made epic music videos. Even thought it's manufactured pop, there were still some quality artists and performers. Then I think about the albums from the '90's that to me were the epitome of great music back then. What about classic Foo Fighters? The Colour and the Shape is still one of my fav albums. "What the Story Morning Glory" by Oasis is also one of those albums that I still get lost in when I listen to it. Wonderwall still makes my Top 100 songs because it's so beautiful.
For me, my fav decade would be the '00, probably because that's when I was in my prime music listening youth - late teens, early twenty. This was late high school, all of college. My favorite genre, pop punk, was getting a lot of mainstream love. And groan as much as you want, but John Mayer is (or at least was) a fantastic artist. And now, in the '10s there is so much new stuff happening. Maybe I am not that into mainstream music, but from a punk rock scene, great new things are going down. I'd even go as far to say that we're on the precipice of some louder post-hardcore/metalcore bands breaking into the mainstream. Rock music has been really underplayed in the main lately, unless you count that folk rock crap (and I don't).
I could list more and more artists that I love from the last 4 decades, and although people won't necessarily agree with my choices, I am sure other people could think of equally amazing artists and music to put in the places of the loves that I listed.
Once I got past the mere listing of songs and artists that have been making magic since 1975, I tried to get to the bottom of why this really bugged me - get to the ideology that underlies the long list of examples. And I think I figured it out.
For me, with music, it's all about (1) connecting with an old favorite, and (2) discovering something new. Every song I haven't heard is a potential new old favorite. As much as I love all the music I know, I am always looking for something new. It doesn't have to be new as in recently released - just new to my ears. I may hear one song from someone, and then a quick trip to iTunes later, and I suddenly have 4+ new albums all by one artist. I did it recently with Cartel. How I missed these guys in the '00s is a mystery. I love that moment when a new song just weaves its way into your soul, and suddenly you've listened to it 50 times in a week. I'm pretty sure I listened to Bring Me the Horizon's "Can You Feel My Heart" 15+ times the day I downloaded it. As much as I love old favorites, it's hard to get that feeling with something you've known for awhile. (Although, I do love when a fav you've over played with comes back around, and you get the renewed feeling like it was when it was new).
And I love to see the progression. The way music changes tells a story. I'm pretty sure I've successfully predicted the last 2-4 popular music trends just by understanding where music was, is, and needs to be to match what people are looking for. I like hearing an artist refine and improve over the years. I like hearing genres change, blend, and emerge all by the innovations of artists. I used to not like synthesized music mixed with loud rock. But as it was used more, I realized my dislike was not the sound, but the fear of losing live music performances. But once I saw a band can still mix in sounds and give a raging show, I embraced it. I see music as a stream - a long flow of what has existed over the years. As a huge music fan, it's important for me to have an appreciation for the past - I have a good collection of older music, and I know more than I own. I don't think you can appreciate music as well without an understanding where it comes from - whatever genre you enjoy. Personally, I love listening to a band and being able to hear their influences. I saw a band recently that I would describe as the music love child of Lynyrd Skynyrd and Something Corporate. And when I listen to Falling in Reverse, I can really hear, and appreciate that classic metal influence, mix with that very modern, now post-hardcore sound. I enjoy being able to discover new music as it's happening, but still impress my elders w/ awesome play list I make for work functions w/ music from before I was born.
But more than that, I think to me music defines generations - it's what's made and then left behind to tell the world your story once you've grown and moved past that point in time. So, for me, staying up with music is about keeping up with history as it's being made. It's about understanding trends and moods in society. As much as I disliked Baby Bush as President, he did inspire some amazing punk rock songs. Nowadays you just don't get that kind of rebellious edge. It's hard to sing angry political unrest songs about immigration reform and government ran health care. But when I do listen to that stuff, it takes me back to that time. And listening to new music keeps me out in the world, even if that world is younger than me. But I do have bands my own age and older who keep rocking, which gives me something to grow up to. It's nice to hear. I just can't imagine being in love with music so much, but not with anything from my lifetime. It would be, to me, stuck in a time and place that wasn't mine. To lack the appreciation, the joy, the angst, the record of all that's gone on - that's just so sad. One of my greatest fears is that one day I'll just get too old to keep listening to new music - that I'll somehow be told I'm too old, or feel myself as too old, to really appreciate music to be. But I would rather have that fear for the future, than not have the love I do now for the music present.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Those Times When "Conservative" and "Hypocrite" Mean the Same Thing
Let's get political! I try not to do so that often, given that I'm pretty far left it can be scary. But I've just about had it lately w/o all the B.S. I'm seeing from Conservatives that it's driving me crazy, and I want to get it off my chest.
Disclaimer: I have no problem with people being Conservative. I happen to know and like a lot of Conservatives that I know personally. But there are soooo many in government and on TV being stupid and hypocrites that it's those that I can't stand. If you have Conservative values and live by them genuinely, great! I applaud that. But when Conservatives use their "values" to prop up inequality and hatred, that's when my gloves come off.
So, here goes: things that make Conservatives hypocrites, as seen on TV ;^)
1. Always respect the office of President (unless he's a Dem) - So, I recently learned about the whole Obama saluting with a coffee cup and the media circus around it. And then I saw John Stewart rip those people a new one b/c Bush did a similar thing with a dog. This is just another example I've seen of something I've been feeling awhile. I remember when Bush was President and Conservatives screamed that we should be more respectful b/c no matter our thoughts on the guy, he was the President and ALWAYS deserved respect. Me? I was a huge fan of the TV show "Little Bush," which was hilarious and an honest caricature of those peeps. But as soon as Obama becomes President? People I know personally who chastised me for being disrespectful of Bush turned around and did/said/posted things just as bad or worse. And of course the media is all over Obama over every stupid little thing. Don't like Obama? That's fine, you don't have to. Don't want to show a particular President respect? That's fine, I only do when it's earned. But if those first to are true, then have it be true all across the board. Because I do.
2. The Government shouldn't get involved with my personal liberties ever (unless it's a woman' vagina) - This is a rather short paragraph, b/c I feel like so many other people say it better, and it's self explanatory. Leave women's parts alone. You don't want to regulate things that need it, like polluting and equality, fine, but stop regulating things that you have no damn business regulating!
3. All life is precious and you shouldn't get abortions (but the death penalty is ok) - This one pisses me off. And it's not really the whole Pro-Life thing (because I have my own wacky feelings about abortion) but it's more the way they argue for it. The propound how all life is precious and make it this big deal about killing a soul and on and on. But it's ok to kill full grown living people? I get the people on death row aren't exactly great people, but I feel that if we can't kill people before they are even formed, we can't have the moral right to kill people once they are full blown adults. Don't we have the right to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
4. Ok, this one is a little tenuous, and just the product of my own crazy brain, so it doesn't get a heading. I recently read an article about this school district in Colorado that wants to change history taught in school to only teach parts of history that support the idea that the US is the best, and all about patriotism and supporting America, and basically remove the bits that make the US look bad and encourages dissent. First of all, that's terrible - I'm pretty sure that's what bad countries do to keep citizens in line when their governments are bad for the people. Second - that's unAmerican. Our history is what makes us great, and we learn from it. But also, it made me think of something else. The Conservative Justices on the Supreme Court like to interpret the Constitution using Originalism, which is basically to interpret the Constitution they have to look at it how it was meant back when written. But wait? If we don't teach kids now about ALL of the US history, how can the future Justices even do that? They won't have the correct context, which means they will corrupt the Constitution. But isn't that anti-Conservative? Isn't the Constitution supposed to be honored in its original form? And think about it - not all of the Amendments were written at the beginning. How can we interpret the Amendment not discriminating by race if students don't learn about the terrible racism from the past and how that Amendment came about, and the ramifications of that? Yeah, it was a terrible time, and learning about it made me cry at the pain and injustice of it all. But it's history. And because of that history, we've worked (even if there is still more work to be done) to make things better. Without teaching that to our children, what's the use of the change? What's to stop it from repeating? We have to teach our children all of our history, and then let it be up to them how they decide to be good Americans. Because forcing your idea of what an American is onto them is UnAmerican!
5. The Government shouldn't be our masters and have so much control on our lives (but it's ok if student loan bearers are indentured for ever and ever) - There seems to be a theme here - Conservatives want government out of their business - unless it regulates something that helps their goals of inequality. You would think that if Conservatives don't want the government involved w/ people's lives, then maybe they'd support loan forgiveness in some form - help people achieve, work hard, and then become active members of society who don't need government aid. Because, think about it. There are sooo many people that can contribute, but because they come from places where they can't afford college, they need loans. If they got loans, and then paid, say, a flat amount above their loan amount (whether it's 10% or 100% above their loan amount) and then it's done, that makes sense to me. A Government is not a bank, and should do what's good for its citizens. Even if we have to pay for years and years on loans, if we knew there was a cap on the total owed, eventually the loans would go away. But with job options and education options, some people could end up paying 4, 5, 6, etc. etc. the amount of there loans before completely paying, or getting forgiveness. The Government is obviously getting their money back plus some - why treat the interest like a bank? B/c with less loans, we can start buying houses and having a family and sending in the economy. That's good, right Conservatives? Not to them. B/c giving student loans in the 1st place encourages poor people to better themselves, and as much as Conservatives complain about the poor, they don't want less poor people - they just want them to be invisible and not get aid of any kind. So, if they have to give student loans, why not keep post-grads poor, and maybe the will discourage more people from getting them.
6. Complaints when they aren't allowed to put Christian items in government places, but try to prevent other religions from putting their religious items anywhere else, all in the name of protecting their freedom of religion - never have a group of people so misunderstood the Constitutional rights of Freedom of Religion. It does mean that the government will keep church and state separate so they don't appear to promote one religion as a government religion, thus making people of other religions feel alienated. It doesn't mean Christian religion can be wherever it wants in the government. And it doesn't mean Christians can stop other religious stuff from being where it's allowed. Like I get that many of the founding fathers were Christian, but they had religious persecution too. (Not all forms of Christian were the same back then). So they formed a government that didn't have a religion. And they formed a country that welcome different people from all over. So it only makes sense that the values of non-religion in government protects ALL religions, not just Christians. We all have to play by the same rules.
7. Poor people should stop being poor (but our policies basically want to keep them that way) - the economic inequality in the US probably make me more upset than anything else. I watched this video from the Daily Show yesterday where a Conservative was confronted about the poor health care some Americans receive already (before the ACA). And he said that if poor people want better care they should stop being poor. Really? I didn't think of that. But you know what? I can point to so many things that Conservatives in government support that keep the poor poor - trying to eradicate government aid, increased costs of higher education, terrible primary education in poor areas, food deserts in minority neighborhoods, all sorts of ways corporations and the extremely rich keep money while the rest of us get less and less. And the list goes on and on. People complain about government aid to people in need, but don't know about or ignore way more money given to "aid" people that already have more money than they would ever need - payouts to large banks, helping Wall Street, farm subsidies to rich farmers, etc. etc. You want the poor to stop being poor? Then stop supporting a system where there aren't options to stop being poor (except for those few exceptional people that beat the odds, and are then touted as why things are actually fine). If you don't want to support the poor, fine. If you want the rich to stay rich and believe we are better to have defined economic classes, fine. But just admit that your policies are aimed to do that. Don't perpetuate the trickle down economics lie when you know that's not what you want and that's not what happens.
There are probably soooo many more things for this list, but that's all I can think of at this moment. And there are more things that get me riled up, but I'll save those for some other time.
Disclaimer: I have no problem with people being Conservative. I happen to know and like a lot of Conservatives that I know personally. But there are soooo many in government and on TV being stupid and hypocrites that it's those that I can't stand. If you have Conservative values and live by them genuinely, great! I applaud that. But when Conservatives use their "values" to prop up inequality and hatred, that's when my gloves come off.
So, here goes: things that make Conservatives hypocrites, as seen on TV ;^)
1. Always respect the office of President (unless he's a Dem) - So, I recently learned about the whole Obama saluting with a coffee cup and the media circus around it. And then I saw John Stewart rip those people a new one b/c Bush did a similar thing with a dog. This is just another example I've seen of something I've been feeling awhile. I remember when Bush was President and Conservatives screamed that we should be more respectful b/c no matter our thoughts on the guy, he was the President and ALWAYS deserved respect. Me? I was a huge fan of the TV show "Little Bush," which was hilarious and an honest caricature of those peeps. But as soon as Obama becomes President? People I know personally who chastised me for being disrespectful of Bush turned around and did/said/posted things just as bad or worse. And of course the media is all over Obama over every stupid little thing. Don't like Obama? That's fine, you don't have to. Don't want to show a particular President respect? That's fine, I only do when it's earned. But if those first to are true, then have it be true all across the board. Because I do.
2. The Government shouldn't get involved with my personal liberties ever (unless it's a woman' vagina) - This is a rather short paragraph, b/c I feel like so many other people say it better, and it's self explanatory. Leave women's parts alone. You don't want to regulate things that need it, like polluting and equality, fine, but stop regulating things that you have no damn business regulating!
3. All life is precious and you shouldn't get abortions (but the death penalty is ok) - This one pisses me off. And it's not really the whole Pro-Life thing (because I have my own wacky feelings about abortion) but it's more the way they argue for it. The propound how all life is precious and make it this big deal about killing a soul and on and on. But it's ok to kill full grown living people? I get the people on death row aren't exactly great people, but I feel that if we can't kill people before they are even formed, we can't have the moral right to kill people once they are full blown adults. Don't we have the right to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
4. Ok, this one is a little tenuous, and just the product of my own crazy brain, so it doesn't get a heading. I recently read an article about this school district in Colorado that wants to change history taught in school to only teach parts of history that support the idea that the US is the best, and all about patriotism and supporting America, and basically remove the bits that make the US look bad and encourages dissent. First of all, that's terrible - I'm pretty sure that's what bad countries do to keep citizens in line when their governments are bad for the people. Second - that's unAmerican. Our history is what makes us great, and we learn from it. But also, it made me think of something else. The Conservative Justices on the Supreme Court like to interpret the Constitution using Originalism, which is basically to interpret the Constitution they have to look at it how it was meant back when written. But wait? If we don't teach kids now about ALL of the US history, how can the future Justices even do that? They won't have the correct context, which means they will corrupt the Constitution. But isn't that anti-Conservative? Isn't the Constitution supposed to be honored in its original form? And think about it - not all of the Amendments were written at the beginning. How can we interpret the Amendment not discriminating by race if students don't learn about the terrible racism from the past and how that Amendment came about, and the ramifications of that? Yeah, it was a terrible time, and learning about it made me cry at the pain and injustice of it all. But it's history. And because of that history, we've worked (even if there is still more work to be done) to make things better. Without teaching that to our children, what's the use of the change? What's to stop it from repeating? We have to teach our children all of our history, and then let it be up to them how they decide to be good Americans. Because forcing your idea of what an American is onto them is UnAmerican!
5. The Government shouldn't be our masters and have so much control on our lives (but it's ok if student loan bearers are indentured for ever and ever) - There seems to be a theme here - Conservatives want government out of their business - unless it regulates something that helps their goals of inequality. You would think that if Conservatives don't want the government involved w/ people's lives, then maybe they'd support loan forgiveness in some form - help people achieve, work hard, and then become active members of society who don't need government aid. Because, think about it. There are sooo many people that can contribute, but because they come from places where they can't afford college, they need loans. If they got loans, and then paid, say, a flat amount above their loan amount (whether it's 10% or 100% above their loan amount) and then it's done, that makes sense to me. A Government is not a bank, and should do what's good for its citizens. Even if we have to pay for years and years on loans, if we knew there was a cap on the total owed, eventually the loans would go away. But with job options and education options, some people could end up paying 4, 5, 6, etc. etc. the amount of there loans before completely paying, or getting forgiveness. The Government is obviously getting their money back plus some - why treat the interest like a bank? B/c with less loans, we can start buying houses and having a family and sending in the economy. That's good, right Conservatives? Not to them. B/c giving student loans in the 1st place encourages poor people to better themselves, and as much as Conservatives complain about the poor, they don't want less poor people - they just want them to be invisible and not get aid of any kind. So, if they have to give student loans, why not keep post-grads poor, and maybe the will discourage more people from getting them.
6. Complaints when they aren't allowed to put Christian items in government places, but try to prevent other religions from putting their religious items anywhere else, all in the name of protecting their freedom of religion - never have a group of people so misunderstood the Constitutional rights of Freedom of Religion. It does mean that the government will keep church and state separate so they don't appear to promote one religion as a government religion, thus making people of other religions feel alienated. It doesn't mean Christian religion can be wherever it wants in the government. And it doesn't mean Christians can stop other religious stuff from being where it's allowed. Like I get that many of the founding fathers were Christian, but they had religious persecution too. (Not all forms of Christian were the same back then). So they formed a government that didn't have a religion. And they formed a country that welcome different people from all over. So it only makes sense that the values of non-religion in government protects ALL religions, not just Christians. We all have to play by the same rules.
7. Poor people should stop being poor (but our policies basically want to keep them that way) - the economic inequality in the US probably make me more upset than anything else. I watched this video from the Daily Show yesterday where a Conservative was confronted about the poor health care some Americans receive already (before the ACA). And he said that if poor people want better care they should stop being poor. Really? I didn't think of that. But you know what? I can point to so many things that Conservatives in government support that keep the poor poor - trying to eradicate government aid, increased costs of higher education, terrible primary education in poor areas, food deserts in minority neighborhoods, all sorts of ways corporations and the extremely rich keep money while the rest of us get less and less. And the list goes on and on. People complain about government aid to people in need, but don't know about or ignore way more money given to "aid" people that already have more money than they would ever need - payouts to large banks, helping Wall Street, farm subsidies to rich farmers, etc. etc. You want the poor to stop being poor? Then stop supporting a system where there aren't options to stop being poor (except for those few exceptional people that beat the odds, and are then touted as why things are actually fine). If you don't want to support the poor, fine. If you want the rich to stay rich and believe we are better to have defined economic classes, fine. But just admit that your policies are aimed to do that. Don't perpetuate the trickle down economics lie when you know that's not what you want and that's not what happens.
There are probably soooo many more things for this list, but that's all I can think of at this moment. And there are more things that get me riled up, but I'll save those for some other time.
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Oh the Feels! I Think I Used All the Tissues
Do you ever have those moments, where one minute you're just thinking about something, anything, entirely random, and then somehow your train of thought takes you someplace, and suddenly you're sobbing hysterically, trying to keep down the noise so your roommate in the next room doesn't hear? I had one of those moments today. I felt compelled to write about it.
It started in the most random of places. All I was doing was thinking about job interviews. I do that sometimes - where I imagine questions that I may get asked, and how I would response. I was thinking about my work ethic, about what if someone asked "where do you get your great work ethic?"
That thought make me jump straight to my dad. My mom worked hard too, she's a huge influence too. I guess I just can't say there are many other good quality traits my dad taught me (as oppsed to the many I got from my mom), so I attribute this one to him.
I also attribute to him my dislike of yard sales and flea markets, because for all of my childhood I remember weekends helping dad set up yard sales and going to the flea market or the large auction sites. I remember hating it, because who as a kid, and then a teenager, wants to spend their weekend working, helping dad, lifting heavy boxes and getting sweaty. I sure didn't. That's not to say there weren't fun times - cool random stuff I got to buy, usually cheap. And of course I got to eat whatever I wanted b/c mom wasn't around.
That's when I realized all this time as a kid is probably why, as an adult, I don't really get bothered as much by working long days or weekends (at least not nearly as bothered as so many others I know and don't know get bothered). I guess I am just used to it. And at least now I get paid real adult wages, and I can sit comfortably inside instead of getting sweaty outside.
But those thoughts are not what got the tears pouring.
[Just a warning/disclaimer - this may get you a little misty eyed. If it doesn't, either I'm a terrible writer, or you have no soul! I'm going to go with my gut that it's the latter, but you be the judge.]
I started to thinking about where my dad got his work ethic from, because for all his faults, he taught his kids the value of hard work. And that, he learned from his mom. And he's not the only one. I've heard plenty of times one of my relatives (maybe my dad, one of his 3 brothers, my mom, one of the many, MANY extended relations we had) expand upon just how hard my grandmother always worked.
Her life was far from easy - born in the south, starting a family young. Her and my grandfather moved to California with their first two sons (or was it after the 3?). I remember stories from her about working at the cannery - which is something hard to imagine now, as I think of cans being filled and closed by machines. And having to work other jobs too, more than one at a time, all while raising 4 boys. There are times when I think it was probably harder raising kids with a bad spouse, than on your own, because there is so much more pain when someone you love hurts you, and makes you life harder instead of helping to carry your burdens. Obviously I wasn't there, so I can't know how the times were all the time, but just remembering the terrible stories I've heard breaks my heart, to know anyone could be so mean to someone who was go loving and gave so much for her family.
Just now, going back over these thoughts, and fleshing them is making the tears worse. I have to wipe the tears from my eyes just to see that I've spelt some of these words correctly. Usually, I don't like to write about my feelings, but I couldn't help it. It felt wrong to keep this in, so cry it out and let it pass, without something substantial to know it happened. So, I'll continue.
Next, I began thinking about what it was like growing up, going to grandma's house. It was a small house, and not in great condition. But there was something about going to grandma's house that was like stepping into another world. I've never been to the South - I've barely made it past Colorado (within the US anyway), so all I knew about the place was from pictures and stories from my grandparents. But I always imagined it was like grandma's house - surrounded by orchards, people driving big trucks, animals out and about, and the houses much farther apart than where I lived in the suburbs. It's not like they lived far away (20-30 minutes maybe?), and it was definitely still California. But i guess being young, it always left an impression on me.
I remember grandma's garden. It wasn't like today, with all this trendy, organic crazed hype about having little gardens in your back yard. This was the real deal - little rows of vegetables growing as they wished, fresh made food, things pickled in jars looking authetic and rustic, not crafty and trendy.
At this time, I was already in tears - nostalgic for the old days, parts from my youth that are gone and lost forever. I began thinking about when grandma died. It was October, and it happened pretty suddenly. I am most thankful that I got to see her before she went, but remebering that last moment is still so sad. We were just talking, about anything. It was just nice to chat. And then she something we should do at Thanksgiving. As I told her that was something I wanted to do, inside it was all I could do to keep from falling apart. There would be no Thanksgiving, there wouldn't even be a next week - not here anyway, not with us. But I couldn't let this last moment to affected by that knowledge, so I held it in.
I feel like I held a lot of it in. The funeral was on the Tuesday following that last moment, and that following Saturday, and the Saturday after that, I had exams - important ones for my last year for grad school. I don't think at that time I had the room for mourning. It's like, if I really let it in, really felt it, then everything would fall apart and I wouldn't make it through. So, I just kept holding it in -
Which is why I think I still have these occasional moments - moments when out of nowhere, that extreme feeling of loss becomes overwhelming. With any loss, it fades with time, because you except it, you really feel it before, so later it just becomes this memory that you loved someone, and they loved you, and that love still exists.
I think about love and loss, and how people say when you loss someone, it's like a hole in your heart. Maybe sometimes that's true. Maybe if the loss is painful in a hurtful way, like the person was bad or did something terrible to maim your heart. But when you loose someone you love because life just takes them away, I don't think there's a hole. It's more of an impression.
Or maybe it's like replacing a framed photo where a person used to be - you can still see them, you can still feel that love, but it's just a one way conversation now. Not that when people leave they stop loving us (I choose to believe in an afterlife, however that happens) but instead we now feel that love coming from the place inside where we know they loved us, rather than getting the love from the source. And as much as that can hurt, and as much as that makes us cry, there's a beauty in that. I believe in feeling the beauty in the pain - knowing that something so wonderful exists that its loss can feel this strong. I never dislike feeling, even the bad things, because to feel at all is wonderful, and it means that I am living, and letting others into my life. And it's time that I learn to share that more.
It started in the most random of places. All I was doing was thinking about job interviews. I do that sometimes - where I imagine questions that I may get asked, and how I would response. I was thinking about my work ethic, about what if someone asked "where do you get your great work ethic?"
That thought make me jump straight to my dad. My mom worked hard too, she's a huge influence too. I guess I just can't say there are many other good quality traits my dad taught me (as oppsed to the many I got from my mom), so I attribute this one to him.
I also attribute to him my dislike of yard sales and flea markets, because for all of my childhood I remember weekends helping dad set up yard sales and going to the flea market or the large auction sites. I remember hating it, because who as a kid, and then a teenager, wants to spend their weekend working, helping dad, lifting heavy boxes and getting sweaty. I sure didn't. That's not to say there weren't fun times - cool random stuff I got to buy, usually cheap. And of course I got to eat whatever I wanted b/c mom wasn't around.
That's when I realized all this time as a kid is probably why, as an adult, I don't really get bothered as much by working long days or weekends (at least not nearly as bothered as so many others I know and don't know get bothered). I guess I am just used to it. And at least now I get paid real adult wages, and I can sit comfortably inside instead of getting sweaty outside.
But those thoughts are not what got the tears pouring.
[Just a warning/disclaimer - this may get you a little misty eyed. If it doesn't, either I'm a terrible writer, or you have no soul! I'm going to go with my gut that it's the latter, but you be the judge.]
I started to thinking about where my dad got his work ethic from, because for all his faults, he taught his kids the value of hard work. And that, he learned from his mom. And he's not the only one. I've heard plenty of times one of my relatives (maybe my dad, one of his 3 brothers, my mom, one of the many, MANY extended relations we had) expand upon just how hard my grandmother always worked.
Her life was far from easy - born in the south, starting a family young. Her and my grandfather moved to California with their first two sons (or was it after the 3?). I remember stories from her about working at the cannery - which is something hard to imagine now, as I think of cans being filled and closed by machines. And having to work other jobs too, more than one at a time, all while raising 4 boys. There are times when I think it was probably harder raising kids with a bad spouse, than on your own, because there is so much more pain when someone you love hurts you, and makes you life harder instead of helping to carry your burdens. Obviously I wasn't there, so I can't know how the times were all the time, but just remembering the terrible stories I've heard breaks my heart, to know anyone could be so mean to someone who was go loving and gave so much for her family.
Just now, going back over these thoughts, and fleshing them is making the tears worse. I have to wipe the tears from my eyes just to see that I've spelt some of these words correctly. Usually, I don't like to write about my feelings, but I couldn't help it. It felt wrong to keep this in, so cry it out and let it pass, without something substantial to know it happened. So, I'll continue.
Next, I began thinking about what it was like growing up, going to grandma's house. It was a small house, and not in great condition. But there was something about going to grandma's house that was like stepping into another world. I've never been to the South - I've barely made it past Colorado (within the US anyway), so all I knew about the place was from pictures and stories from my grandparents. But I always imagined it was like grandma's house - surrounded by orchards, people driving big trucks, animals out and about, and the houses much farther apart than where I lived in the suburbs. It's not like they lived far away (20-30 minutes maybe?), and it was definitely still California. But i guess being young, it always left an impression on me.
I remember grandma's garden. It wasn't like today, with all this trendy, organic crazed hype about having little gardens in your back yard. This was the real deal - little rows of vegetables growing as they wished, fresh made food, things pickled in jars looking authetic and rustic, not crafty and trendy.
At this time, I was already in tears - nostalgic for the old days, parts from my youth that are gone and lost forever. I began thinking about when grandma died. It was October, and it happened pretty suddenly. I am most thankful that I got to see her before she went, but remebering that last moment is still so sad. We were just talking, about anything. It was just nice to chat. And then she something we should do at Thanksgiving. As I told her that was something I wanted to do, inside it was all I could do to keep from falling apart. There would be no Thanksgiving, there wouldn't even be a next week - not here anyway, not with us. But I couldn't let this last moment to affected by that knowledge, so I held it in.
I feel like I held a lot of it in. The funeral was on the Tuesday following that last moment, and that following Saturday, and the Saturday after that, I had exams - important ones for my last year for grad school. I don't think at that time I had the room for mourning. It's like, if I really let it in, really felt it, then everything would fall apart and I wouldn't make it through. So, I just kept holding it in -
Which is why I think I still have these occasional moments - moments when out of nowhere, that extreme feeling of loss becomes overwhelming. With any loss, it fades with time, because you except it, you really feel it before, so later it just becomes this memory that you loved someone, and they loved you, and that love still exists.
I think about love and loss, and how people say when you loss someone, it's like a hole in your heart. Maybe sometimes that's true. Maybe if the loss is painful in a hurtful way, like the person was bad or did something terrible to maim your heart. But when you loose someone you love because life just takes them away, I don't think there's a hole. It's more of an impression.
Or maybe it's like replacing a framed photo where a person used to be - you can still see them, you can still feel that love, but it's just a one way conversation now. Not that when people leave they stop loving us (I choose to believe in an afterlife, however that happens) but instead we now feel that love coming from the place inside where we know they loved us, rather than getting the love from the source. And as much as that can hurt, and as much as that makes us cry, there's a beauty in that. I believe in feeling the beauty in the pain - knowing that something so wonderful exists that its loss can feel this strong. I never dislike feeling, even the bad things, because to feel at all is wonderful, and it means that I am living, and letting others into my life. And it's time that I learn to share that more.
Monday, September 1, 2014
Am I Too Old to Be a Runaway?
And no, I don't actually want to run away, like from home or anything. Although, that's rather enticing, for sure. No, what I referring to is a moniker taken on by fans of the band Crown the Empire, from their recent album, The Resistance: Rise of the Runaways. I like to rep bands that I love, even if no one sees it, because at the very least I get to blog about things I love, and I love this band!
I first heard about Crown the Empire from Alternative Press, who made the band one of AP's 2013 100 Bands You Need to Know This Year issue. I always like to check out new bands (whether it's an actual new band or just one I haven't listened to yet). And I just love hearing what's new and how my favorite genres of music are evolving.
What I love most about this band is the epicness of their music. Their first full length album, "The Fallout" is all about love and apocalypse. I like that there's a big story/theme in the album and it just rocks. One of the things I tend to here with newer bands is an album full of songs that mostly sound the same, with one or two unique ones mixed in, and it's not until later that the band expands their sound, or just keeps on doing the same stuff until their inevitable short end.
But not Crown the Empire! They have so much variety for a new band, and a really great sense of self. I particularly love the mixing the strings into the loud rock. It gives their music more depth and really makes it more epic. I do like to think that if the apocalypse were to come, or at least in a movie version I would script, the apocalypse would be to the soundtrack of loud rock and classical strings. :^) That's how I always imagined it.
Plus, I love this band's sense of showmanship. They actually put thought on how they want to appear on stage. They have a wardrobe, which I think really adds to the performance. And yes, I have seen them live. Twice. And I can't wait for the next time. Granted, the first time I saw them live, Andy Leo didn't do that great w/ the singing. But I think that has to do w/ being new and having to adjust to the rigor of singing so much so often. Luckily, David Escamilla stepped it up and took on some singing as well as his excellent growling/screaming/whatever term fits best. Personally, I think David is excellent as a vocalist, one of the better "unclean" vocalists I've heard in awhile. And of course the second time I saw them, this time at this year's Warped Tour, they definitely brought their A game and rocked it.
Oh, and the band has a pretty cool logo. As a fan of Trademarks, I appreciate these things. And the guys are pretty easy on the eyes. Not that I'm checking out guys significantly younger than me. ;^) Ok I am. Muahahaha. But seriously, this is one of the better looking bands. One of the guitarist is like guy model hot.
So, their new album came out recently, as mentioned before, and I have been rocking out to it quite often since then. I pre-ordered it, helping make it #1 on the iTunes rock album list. It's nice to see people support actual good rock music, even if the mainstream's idea of good rock music is totally lame. (Really, in what Universe does Lorde deserve "Best Rock Video" MTV? Idiots!)
They really expanded upon what they do best, epic rock with some strings and a lot of emotions. But I definitely feel this is a big step up from their first full album. (Their EP is good too, as a good start to becoming super awesome). They definitely expanded on what they can do. Like, how David did more legit singing on this album. He's pretty good, but surprising quiet when actually singing. It makes a nice blend w/ how powerful he is when doing the unclean vocals. I always find it interesting when bands have two vocalists, since I always wonder how that dynamic works when deciding on how to do vocals for songs. But I think Andy and David are a good mix with each other. I see David has having this just raw, untamed energy to him performing, while Andy seems more, idk if composed is right, or more calculated. Like, he has this sweeter looking face, but something manically wicked underneath. It's a fun pairing.
I am particulary a fan of their softer moments on this album, something newer. And I am glad to see that Andy has stepped up his singing game, because there's that one slow song on their EP that is sooooo badly sung, it hurts me ears. It's a pretty song, but soooo hard to listen to. But Andy really grew as a singer and performer since their last album. That shows some great maturity and great hope for the band to go on forever and ever (or at least long enough to become old and start doing casino tours. Sorry, that's a favorite new joke of mine, that no matter how famous you become as a musician, in the end, if they keep performing, they always end up playing casinos).
But I digress. Where was I? Oh, yeah, softer moments. I love the song Millenia. I don't hear too many rock ballads these days, at least not many that are reminicent of the good old days of epic rock ballads. And although it's only 2 minutes long, I think Satellites may be my favorite, mostly b/c I've already memorized it and I bust it out in my car on the way to and from work. It's great stress relief! I really like Machines - It's got some great lyrics and a great message. Mnstr is pretty bad ass - definitely the heavist they're done. They said that, not me, when I saw them at Warped Tour. Usually I don't like when a band plays their new stuff, b/c I can't sing along, but it's a great song, so it was cool to hear before the album came out. Plus, it helped to alleviate the usual fears I get when a new album comes out from a band I like, b/c I am always a little worried it's going to disappoint.
Probably another close contender for my favorite song on the album is Rise of the Runaways. It definitely gets me pumped on the way to work. Also, the beginning of the song reminds me of Styx, from Kilroy Was Here, and who doesn't love that? And then the song picks up speed and rocks my socks off. Oh, and I feel like I can't quit this blog post w/o mentioning Johnny's Rebellion. I got The Fallout before the EP, limitless, so I didn't get Johnny's Revenge at first. But I love how they carried the story through all three releases. Johnny's Revenge is still my favorite, but I love how the story plays out, and how the 3rd part at the end brings it back to lyrics from Johnny Ringo. It's some great framing.
So, that's my thoughts on Crown the Empire and their new album, The Resistance: Rise of the Runaways. Really, the only thing I don't like about it is that the album just came out, so it's going to be too long to wait for the next one.
I first heard about Crown the Empire from Alternative Press, who made the band one of AP's 2013 100 Bands You Need to Know This Year issue. I always like to check out new bands (whether it's an actual new band or just one I haven't listened to yet). And I just love hearing what's new and how my favorite genres of music are evolving.
What I love most about this band is the epicness of their music. Their first full length album, "The Fallout" is all about love and apocalypse. I like that there's a big story/theme in the album and it just rocks. One of the things I tend to here with newer bands is an album full of songs that mostly sound the same, with one or two unique ones mixed in, and it's not until later that the band expands their sound, or just keeps on doing the same stuff until their inevitable short end.
But not Crown the Empire! They have so much variety for a new band, and a really great sense of self. I particularly love the mixing the strings into the loud rock. It gives their music more depth and really makes it more epic. I do like to think that if the apocalypse were to come, or at least in a movie version I would script, the apocalypse would be to the soundtrack of loud rock and classical strings. :^) That's how I always imagined it.
Plus, I love this band's sense of showmanship. They actually put thought on how they want to appear on stage. They have a wardrobe, which I think really adds to the performance. And yes, I have seen them live. Twice. And I can't wait for the next time. Granted, the first time I saw them live, Andy Leo didn't do that great w/ the singing. But I think that has to do w/ being new and having to adjust to the rigor of singing so much so often. Luckily, David Escamilla stepped it up and took on some singing as well as his excellent growling/screaming/whatever term fits best. Personally, I think David is excellent as a vocalist, one of the better "unclean" vocalists I've heard in awhile. And of course the second time I saw them, this time at this year's Warped Tour, they definitely brought their A game and rocked it.
Oh, and the band has a pretty cool logo. As a fan of Trademarks, I appreciate these things. And the guys are pretty easy on the eyes. Not that I'm checking out guys significantly younger than me. ;^) Ok I am. Muahahaha. But seriously, this is one of the better looking bands. One of the guitarist is like guy model hot.
So, their new album came out recently, as mentioned before, and I have been rocking out to it quite often since then. I pre-ordered it, helping make it #1 on the iTunes rock album list. It's nice to see people support actual good rock music, even if the mainstream's idea of good rock music is totally lame. (Really, in what Universe does Lorde deserve "Best Rock Video" MTV? Idiots!)
They really expanded upon what they do best, epic rock with some strings and a lot of emotions. But I definitely feel this is a big step up from their first full album. (Their EP is good too, as a good start to becoming super awesome). They definitely expanded on what they can do. Like, how David did more legit singing on this album. He's pretty good, but surprising quiet when actually singing. It makes a nice blend w/ how powerful he is when doing the unclean vocals. I always find it interesting when bands have two vocalists, since I always wonder how that dynamic works when deciding on how to do vocals for songs. But I think Andy and David are a good mix with each other. I see David has having this just raw, untamed energy to him performing, while Andy seems more, idk if composed is right, or more calculated. Like, he has this sweeter looking face, but something manically wicked underneath. It's a fun pairing.
I am particulary a fan of their softer moments on this album, something newer. And I am glad to see that Andy has stepped up his singing game, because there's that one slow song on their EP that is sooooo badly sung, it hurts me ears. It's a pretty song, but soooo hard to listen to. But Andy really grew as a singer and performer since their last album. That shows some great maturity and great hope for the band to go on forever and ever (or at least long enough to become old and start doing casino tours. Sorry, that's a favorite new joke of mine, that no matter how famous you become as a musician, in the end, if they keep performing, they always end up playing casinos).
But I digress. Where was I? Oh, yeah, softer moments. I love the song Millenia. I don't hear too many rock ballads these days, at least not many that are reminicent of the good old days of epic rock ballads. And although it's only 2 minutes long, I think Satellites may be my favorite, mostly b/c I've already memorized it and I bust it out in my car on the way to and from work. It's great stress relief! I really like Machines - It's got some great lyrics and a great message. Mnstr is pretty bad ass - definitely the heavist they're done. They said that, not me, when I saw them at Warped Tour. Usually I don't like when a band plays their new stuff, b/c I can't sing along, but it's a great song, so it was cool to hear before the album came out. Plus, it helped to alleviate the usual fears I get when a new album comes out from a band I like, b/c I am always a little worried it's going to disappoint.
Probably another close contender for my favorite song on the album is Rise of the Runaways. It definitely gets me pumped on the way to work. Also, the beginning of the song reminds me of Styx, from Kilroy Was Here, and who doesn't love that? And then the song picks up speed and rocks my socks off. Oh, and I feel like I can't quit this blog post w/o mentioning Johnny's Rebellion. I got The Fallout before the EP, limitless, so I didn't get Johnny's Revenge at first. But I love how they carried the story through all three releases. Johnny's Revenge is still my favorite, but I love how the story plays out, and how the 3rd part at the end brings it back to lyrics from Johnny Ringo. It's some great framing.
So, that's my thoughts on Crown the Empire and their new album, The Resistance: Rise of the Runaways. Really, the only thing I don't like about it is that the album just came out, so it's going to be too long to wait for the next one.
Friday, July 18, 2014
Embracing the Delta
If I could use just one word to describe my life in recent years, the only really obvious choice would be "change." And I think that most people, in one area or another, can say the same. As with many, many things, that got me to thinking. What does change mean to me?
You hear a lot about people who don't like change. I get that. Sometimes it's hard to handle new things. More rarely, you hear about people who love change. But that got me to wondering, how do I feel about change? I've never really thought about it before, because it just happens, whether I have feelings about it or not.
As I got to thinking, it reminded me of the last stanza of one of my favorite poems "Mutability" by Percy Shelley:
It is the same!—For, be it joy or sorrow,
The path of its departure still is free;
Man's yesterday may ne'er be like his morrow;
Nought may endure but Mutability.
I find that last line particularly meaningful "Nought may endure but Mutability." Or more simply, the only constant is change.
If change is a constant in my life, how should I feel about it? I began thinking of all the changes I've been through - work, life, family, friends, age - and really not much is similar about every change I've made.
The one similarity though through most changes? It's usually never easy. I think one of the reasons people are resistant to change is that change takes effort. If most changes were easy, the would be done already. But just because something is difficult doesn't make it bad.
I finally decided, given all I've taken in above, that I don't like or dislike change. Don't get me wrong, there are changes that I've loved and those that made me miserable, but there's a distinction. I realized that it's less constructive to have an opinion on change one way or the other. Not that having one is bad for others, but for me it doesn't make sense.
See, I realized that having a feeling toward change, as an abstract idea, is too broad a stroke. Change in the abstract is so vague and so without good or bad, that it should just be. Rather, if I am going to have feelings about change, it should be in the context of each particular change, not change in general.
I think the problem that people have is they feel about change as either good or bad no matter the change. But I think the importance of making meaningful changes, or at least coping with the ones that are made for you, is really evaluating the change in context, and judging it for what it is, not what you want or fear it to be.
As I mentioned earlier, most change is difficult, no matter how wonderful in the long run. So, before making judgements on change, it's important to keep that in mind. I know that as people we have trouble sometimes thinking beyond the here and now, but if we can make that effort, our future selves will be very thankful.
So, when it comes to change, you shouldn't ask yourself "do I like or dislike change" but rather "how do I feel about this change." And think critically! Is this the right change to fix my problem? Will this change be better for me down the line? If I don't have control to prevent this change, can I help manage the results of the change? If this is the wrong change, can I admit it and change again? Can I embrace each new change with a fresh perspective?
I believe that if we each really make the effort to embrace change, and really engage it, that we can make great use of change. It may take hard work, and we may stumble along the way, but it's better to steer the ship of change than to let the winds carry the ship where they will.
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Picking Flowers
I have been thinking a lot about the path that my life is traveling down. If life we just one road, continuous from start to finish, it might be easier to weather the journey.
I feel like once my life was one, long road. Each important life event is a mile marker. Walk, talk, start school, finish middle school, start high school, end same. Start on some path to a career, keep on, and on, and along the way you may gain and lose travelers, but on the road continues.
But I don't feel like that anymore. I once was on a long road. I had a map, and plan. And I set my journey to follow those until the end. But I turned a corner to find, instead of continuing along ever fainter into the distance, that the road ended.
Where that road ended, a whole city of roads opened up. I knew not where to set my feet again, so I wondered the roads of this city, trying many but staying with none, until I found another path to take.
I took this path, expecting to find that it would finally lead me into the horizon. A path is never easy, and you cannot see what lies ahead, but at least if you put on foot in front of the other, you can make it down the path, and encounter everything along the way.
But again I found this path did not lead me where it should - where I want so desperately to be. There is no road ahead for me to follow.
Instead, this new path lead me to a field. Try as I might to find another road to take, all around me is a vast empty field. Even the road that lead me there has vanished, never to be traced back to where I began.
I know this field wants me to make it something, wants me to carve my own path through it and lead myself on other journey. I cry out to the field, tell me what you want to be! Give me direction so that I am not the one who decides your fate. Yet the field remains stubbornly silent.
I wait for guidance. I wait for another traveler to place a path beneath my feet so that I may follow. I have no preference for where I will go, and how I will get there. And that's why the field remains so.
Perhaps I'll stop, and pick some flowers. And with their colorful distraction, perhaps luck brings inspiration.
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
Why Is iTunes So Judgemental?
Like many people who have embraced the 21st Century, I almost exclusively by my music from iTunes. I find it very convenient. I can sample the music before I buy it - if only I could have done that when I was younger, I would have saved so much money on cds I only bought for like one good song. Also, given my awesome, yet specialized, taste in music, I can actually get artists that you may only find in large cd stores, which are inconvenient to go to.
However, I am not a fan of some of the artist bios and album descriptions that are on iTunes. I get that my taste in music is not mainstream, but that doesn't mean iTunes can be a jerk about the bands I love!
I am a big fan of punk music, particularly pop punk, in its various forms. Idk how many times I have read some not nice things about the genre from descriptions on iTunes. Like how the like to mention the genre has no range, and that band's album is surprisingly good given the limitations of the genre. To that, I say "Screw You!" A genre is only as limited as the artists chose to make it (and I think they are awesome, so bite me). Or maybe the iTunes editors are just limited in their exposure to the music, so they don't know what they are talking about. Booooooooo!!
Or like today, I purchased the Black Veil Brides "Wretched and Divine" album (because it's awesome!). And yes, eventually the editor got to just how good the music is and that the band is freaking awesome. But first, they have to take a dig at their appearance. After the long winded, and rather rude description of how the band presents itself physically, the praise of their music seems more back handed or incredulous. Frankly, I find this uber insulting. BVB has a very dedicated fan base (which is very much deserved, and one of the reason I checked their music out in the first place). An album description is not the place to make such insulting comments. Granted, if someone's music is bad, then make an objective observation of that. But don't be an ass hole just because you don't understand a style of music or an artist.
So basically, that's my rant. I get I don't listen to the most popular music, but for those of us that like it, we are very dedicated, perhaps more so than many other types of music. Maybe instead of letting their editors be uneducated douche bags, iTunes can actually hire someone to edit the info who's not lame. Instead, have someone who actually gets it make these descriptions, so at least they can be accurate, and give great music its fair dues.
:^P
However, I am not a fan of some of the artist bios and album descriptions that are on iTunes. I get that my taste in music is not mainstream, but that doesn't mean iTunes can be a jerk about the bands I love!
I am a big fan of punk music, particularly pop punk, in its various forms. Idk how many times I have read some not nice things about the genre from descriptions on iTunes. Like how the like to mention the genre has no range, and that band's album is surprisingly good given the limitations of the genre. To that, I say "Screw You!" A genre is only as limited as the artists chose to make it (and I think they are awesome, so bite me). Or maybe the iTunes editors are just limited in their exposure to the music, so they don't know what they are talking about. Booooooooo!!
Or like today, I purchased the Black Veil Brides "Wretched and Divine" album (because it's awesome!). And yes, eventually the editor got to just how good the music is and that the band is freaking awesome. But first, they have to take a dig at their appearance. After the long winded, and rather rude description of how the band presents itself physically, the praise of their music seems more back handed or incredulous. Frankly, I find this uber insulting. BVB has a very dedicated fan base (which is very much deserved, and one of the reason I checked their music out in the first place). An album description is not the place to make such insulting comments. Granted, if someone's music is bad, then make an objective observation of that. But don't be an ass hole just because you don't understand a style of music or an artist.
So basically, that's my rant. I get I don't listen to the most popular music, but for those of us that like it, we are very dedicated, perhaps more so than many other types of music. Maybe instead of letting their editors be uneducated douche bags, iTunes can actually hire someone to edit the info who's not lame. Instead, have someone who actually gets it make these descriptions, so at least they can be accurate, and give great music its fair dues.
:^P
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)