World in My Eyes

Below are two images I've created. They were produced in Adobe Illustrator from a couple of photos I took in downtown Savannah. I'm really quite pleased with them actually and may keep working with this style a bit.

As another creative excercise, I want to rework print ads, billboards, and magazine layouts that are not pleasing or effective. While this will may get me hanged, shot, sued by copyright zealots, I think it will be a good way to air out my creative inclinations.


Drayton near Forsyth



Abercorn & Broughton

Mix That Funky Music

The host of a shindig I was attending last week asked if I could help provide the music by bringing my iPod (as if I go anywhere without the damn thing). While this is fine I don't think my acquaintance really understood what she was asking and of whom she was asking it.

What she was asking, unbeknownst to her, was: "Would you mind spending a few hours endlessly pouring over your entire music collection finding six or so hours of the most interesting and fun songs possible and arrange them flawlessly?" The answer: "No, I don't mind."

You see, I love art and music is simply a subset of that general term. I think about what the music being played around me. This is even true in stores where muzak versions of good tunes will either illicit cackling or tears (depending, of course, on my own mental fragility at that moment). I put my iPod on "shuffle" and it the next button eight or nine times until a song I want to hear comes up its massive randomized queue.

It's not as if my music collection was compiled by strangers in the dark, blindfolded, randomly downloading the obscurities of many disparate artists. I'm just not always in the mood for everything that "shuffle" will through at me. Sometimes it just not a Devo moment and other times nothing is more appropriate.

I'm sure most normal people can simply ignore the music they hear when it doesn't interest them. Those folks could probably just "shuffle" the iPod or rely on the "Genius" feature to mix it dynamically (don't get me started). I just can't. This is the case with most art I encounter. I think about the composition of billboards and the color schemes of cereal boxes and the faux-Indie tripe being played in bookstores.

So I spend three hours or so going over my 10,000+ songs and do, indeed, find about six hours of pure enjoyment. Starting with "Carnival" by the Cardigans and ending with "An Ending (Ascent)" by Brian Eno (and stopping for a bit at all points in between).

As it turned out, my acquaintance didn't use my mix but that really wasn't the point. It was good fun digging through my tunes finding out was wholly separate genres and groups went together nicely ("Emperor Tomato Ketchup" by Stereolab and "Heart of Glass" by Blondie for example). I may make mixes like this from time to time just to dig through the pile a bit (and become the dorkiest music snob in three states).

*UPDATE* The Day the Music Died

Oh! The great equalizer that is the Internet! On Tuesday, I talked about pop star Lily Allen's objections to illegal file sharing and the supposed affects on record companies and artists. It appears, however, that Lily is quite guilty of flagrant copyright violation when it suits her purposes (see Bob's comment on Tuesday's post) but this is too good.

In a scandal sure to be known as "Mixgate," Allen is offering digital "mixtapes" on her website lilyallenmusic.com. The mixtapes feature 30 second to 1 minute cuts from various artists (none of which gave Allen permission). What's more, many of the artists featured do not have any connection to EMI (Allen's record label). She is therefore providing an artist's work without permission via the Internet. This is, I'm told, in breach of copyright laws. Smell the hypocrisy.

As of early this morning, all posts on her blog ("It's Not Alright") have been erased. Her latest Twitter update (seen here) says the abuse she was receiving was simply too much.

Brief note to all artist turned pundits: One should probably be aware of what the laws are before you go off supporting or denouncing them. For more on Ms. Allen and the whole sorted affair, see TechDirt's article here.

The Day the Music Died

We've heard, more than once, from artists (usually RIAA members) implying that music piracy will essentially end recorded music. The most recent artist to join the fray is UK pop princess Lily Allen. Allen is essentially opposing illegal file-sharing but more specifically the Featured Artists Coalition's acceptance of it. Allen has started a blog (titled "It's Not Alright") regarding music piracy and collecting letters and kudos of other artists worried that music will simply stop being produced. Seriously? Yeah, seriously.

The legal or moral quandaries surrounding file-sharing, torrents (with a "z"), and piracy really aren't my concern. Nor is this my general distrust of "the man" rearing its inconvenient head as many record companies are certainly not "the man" or any part thereof. No, I have an question of logic.

I'm a bit fuzzy on the details of Lily's logic (as I'm sure she is as well) but I gather it goes something like this: record companies (you know who are!) cannot scratch out a living marketing and selling music because its products (i.e. music) are not being purchased any longer. This results in the collapse of the entire recording industry and, indeed, the art of music altogether into an infinitely dense black hole swallowing that special something that makes us human (and the end of civilization). I feel this argument won't survive scrutiny.

Music has existed in one form or another pretty much since humans have. Record companies on the other hand, have existed about 100 years. Likening the end of record companies to the end of music is like saying the closing of Shotheby's auction house is the end of painting or the downfall of Barnes & Noble is the end of literature. People (you know who you are!) have a deep need to create and will create regardless of the market conditions and sales projections. It's a major part of our humanity. The neanderthals and early modern humans weren't worried about distribution rights when they began painting mammoths on their cave walls.

Record companies are a delivery system. Granted, quite an effective delivery system for quite some time. They were the masters of a supply chain and technology that allowed musicians to move from gifted minority to pop culture icons. This worked out well for a time but things change. They do not own the supply chain that is the Internet and therein lies their weakness. Record companies are not the production method of art, just its broker (its dealer). They no more own it than anyone else. If illegal file-sharing and piracy bring down record companies something else will simply rise to take their place. I think Lily will be fine if she can roll with it.

I don't dislike record companies (some I outright love) but I will not grant them the power over the whole of an art form. The fate of music is not inextricably linked to the success of Atlantic, EMI, and Sony. As with any other art, music lives and dies with us. Music will simply evolve with us even if record companies don't.

My Poor Brain*

I worry about my poor brain. Sometimes as I begin to speak I forget was I was going to say. Other times, I begin one activity only to be quickly (and completely) distracted by something. As soon as I sit down to read or write or anything really I suddenly recall some wholly unrelated thing I've been meaning to ____ [insert verb].

Even my desperately strewn about interests seem to display this (gadgets, economics, politics, history, art, music, film, literature, on and on...) They read more like the required courses for a liberal arts degree! I'm like some kind of academic tourist without the academia.

I believe I'm pretty bright and I am thankful for my mind (I'll miss him when he decides he could do better and leaves me) but this can't be normal or healthy. If everyone's mind was this scattered nothing would ever be accomplished. There would be millions upon millions of half built statues and unfinished paintings and War and Peace would be a pamphlet!

It's my fault. I suppose I abuse the old boy a bit with all the reading and thinking and such. That truly isn't my intention. I mean well enough. I assume he knows that. After all, he's the brains.


*Apologies to Dave Grohl and his Foo Fighters for misappropriating his awesome song title for my not quite as awesome blog post.

Welcomed Visitor

One-man indie powerhouse Jim O'Rourke has released a new album titled The Visitor. It's apparently a single track 38 minute pop opus. I just got it this morning so I don't have any opinion yet. Although, I've never known O'Rourke to disappoint. Find more info about Jim O'Rourke and his new album here.

"I'm a Loser."

Perhaps I'm crazy but the Beatles box set just doesn't seem worth it. It seems, however, a fair chunk of the industrialized world have already lined up for their copies and the critics are weighing in (oh thank God!) but I just can't join in the Liverpudlian orgy.

Is this even necessary? The Onion's A.V. Club Talk's most recent podcast (see here) would lead one to believe that the box set is just this side of indispensable. Can this be? I'm certainly not an expert or audiophile to any degree but I feel the original CD releases I have hold up quite well. I own every album except the first two (please don't judge me harshly) and I'm happy dammit!

And then there's the release of the box set being coupled with the Beatles Rock Band video game. I haven't any issues with the game really but the whole coordinated release thing grates on my artistic sensibilities. I'm actually left wondering if John and George would have been on-board for all this tomfoolery (let's not speculate a la Dave Grohl and Chris Novoselic http://bit.ly/cfhLk.)

It'll be pretty damned hard to revere the Beatles any more that I do already. I don't think Paul's more prominent bass lines or Ringo's more distinct drumming will change my long-held opinions of this band's talent or place in history. I don't think I'll buy the box set or the hype.