#so it's very rare i actually listen to the audio itself anymore | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

joshjacksons · 3 years

Text

Joshua Jackson interview with Refinery29

Against my better judgement, and at the risk of losing any semblance of journalistic objectivity, I start my conversation with Joshua Jackson by effusively telling him what a dream come true it is to be talking to him. See, like many millennial women who grew up watching the late ‘90s and early 2000s teen drama Dawson’s Creek, Jackson’s Pacey Witter means a lot to me. Pacey is one of the rare fictional teen boys of my youth whose adolescent charisma, romantic appeal, and general boyfriend aptitude hold up all these years later (unlike The O.C’s Seth Cohen or Gossip Girl’s Chuck Bass) and that is due in large part to the wit, vulnerability, and care Jackson brought to the character.

It’s the same intention he’s afforded all of his famous roles — Peter Bishop in Fringe, Cole Lockhart in The Affair, and even as a 14-year-old in his first acting gig as sweet-faced heartthrob Charlie Conway in The Mighty Ducks. Now, Jackson, 43, has matured into a solid supporting actor (with memorable turns in Little Fires Everywhere and When They See Us) and as a leading man who can draw you into a story with just his voice (Jackson’s latest project is narrating the psychological thriller and Canadian Audible original, Oracle, one of the over 12,000 titles available today on Audible.ca’s the Plus Catalogue) or find humanity in the most sinister men (he’s currently playing a sociopath with a god complex in Dr. Death). His magnetic pull is as evident as it was when he was the guy you rooted for in a show named after another guy’s creek. Jackson has never seemed to mind the fact that so many people still bring up Pacey decades later, and that’s part of why as an adult, he’s one of the few childhood crushes I still have on a pedestal. I tell him just a tiny slice of this, and Jackson graciously sits up straighter and promises to bring his A-game to our Zoom exchange. Jackson is in what appears to be an office, flanked by mess, like a true work-from-home Dad. He and his wife, fellow actor Jodie Turner-Smith, welcomed a daughter in the early days of the pandemic in 2020, and he tells me that fatherhood and marriage are the best decisions he has ever made. Jackson and Turner-Smith are a rare Hollywood couple who choose to let us in on their love, but not obnoxiously — just through flirty Instagram comments and cheeky tweets. Their pairing is part of Jackson’s enduring appeal. It’s nice to think that Pacey Witter grew up to be a doting dad and adoring husband, even if his wife’s name is Jodie, not Joey.

Jackson is an animated conversationalist, leaning into the camera to emphasize his points — especially when the topic of diversity comes up. White celebs don’t get asked about racism in Hollywood the way their counterparts of colour do, and when they do, they’re usually hesitant at best, and unequipped at worst, to tackle these conversations. Jackson is neither. He’s open, willing, and eager to discuss systemic inequality in the industry he’s grown up in. It’s the bare minimum a straight white man in Hollywood can do, and Jackson seems to know this. When he ventures briefly into trying to explain to me, a Black woman, the perils of being Black, female, and online, he catches himself and jokes that of course, I don’t need him to tell me the racism that happens in the comment section of his wife’s Instagram. The self-deprecating delivery is one I’m familiar with from watching Jackson onscreen for most of my life, and seeing it in person (virtually) renders me almost unable to form sentences. Jackson’s charm is disarming, but his relaxed Canadian energy is so relatable, I manage to maintain my professionalism long enough to get through our conversation. Refinery29: Your voice has been in my head for a few days because I've been listening to Canadian Audible Original, Oracle. What drew you to this project and especially the medium of audio storytelling?

Joshua Jackson: The book itself is such a page turner. I also love the idea of those old radio plays. It's like a hybrid between the beauty of reading a book on the page where your imagination does all of it. We craft a little bit of the world, but because this is a noir thriller married with this metaphysical world, there's a lot of dark and creepy places that your imagination gets to fill in for yourself.

I'm noticing a trend in some of the roles you've been taking on lately, with this and Dr. Death, these stories are very dark and creepy. But so many people still think of you as Pacey Witter, or as Charlie Conway, the prototypical good guys of our youth. Are you deliberately trying to kill Pacey and Charlie?

JJ: I'm not trying to kill anybody — except on screen [laughs]. It's funny, I didn't really think of these two things as companion pieces, but I won't deny that there may be something subconscious in this anxiety, stress-filled year that we've all just had. That may be what I was trying to work out was some of that stress, because that's the beauty of my job. Instead of therapy, I just get someone to pay me to say somebody else's words. So, yeah, that could be a thing [but] the thought process that went into them both was very different. Even though this is a dark story, [lead character, police psychic] Nate Russo is still the hero. [Dr. Death’s] Christopher Duntsch very much is not at all. I can't pretend to know my own mind well enough to be able to tell you exactly how [these two roles] happened, but it happened.

That might be something that you should work through with an actual therapist. JJ: Exactly. Yeah, maybe real therapy is on the docket for me [laughs].

So I was listening to Oracle and you're doing these various creepy voices — I’m sorry the word “creepy” keeps coming up.

JJ: Are you trying to tell me something? You know what? I wanted to skip straight to the creepy old man phase of my career. So, it sounds like I'm doing a good job.

You're doing amazing, sweetie [laughs]. So, I was thinking you must be really good at bedtime stories with your daughter doing all these voices. Or is she still too young for that?

JJ: No! She's all the way into books. Story time is my favourite part of the day because it gives me the opportunity to have that time with her just one-on-one. Her favorite book right now is a book called Bedtime Bonnet. Every night I bring out three books, and she gets to pick one. The other two shift a little bit, but Bedtime Bonnet is every single night.

I love that. Since you're married to a Black woman, you know a thing or two about bonnets. JJ: Yeah, well I'm getting my bonnet education. And I'm getting my silk sheet education. I'm behind the curve, but I'm figuring it out [laughs].

You said in an interview recently that you are now at the age where the best roles for men are. And I wonder if you can expand on that and whether you think of the fact that the same cannot be said for the majority of women actors in their 40s?

JJ: What's great about the age that I'm at now as a man is that, generally speaking, the characters — even if they're not the central character of this show — are well fleshed out. They're being written from a personal perspective, usually from a writer who has enough lived experience and wants to tell the story of a whole character. Whereas when you're younger — and obviously I was very lucky with some of the characters that I was able to play – you're the son or the boyfriend, or you're a very two-dimensional character. It's gotten better, but still a lot like you're either the precocious child or you're the brooding one. I will say that while I would agree with you to a certain point for women, I think that this is probably the best era to be a not 25-year-old-woman in certainly the entirety of my career. And it is also the best time to be a Black woman inside of the industry. There's still more opportunity for a 40-year-old white man than there is for a 40-year-old white woman, but it is better now than it has ever been. The roles that women are able to inhabit and occupy and the opportunities that are out there have multiplied. If I started my career in playing two-dimensional roles to get the three-dimensional roles, most women started their career in three-dimensional roles and end up at “wife” or “mom.” And that's just not the case anymore. There's just a lot of broadly diverse stories being told that centre women. So you're right, but in the last five years, six years I would say, there has really been a pretty significant shift.

And I think that shift is happening because who's behind the camera is also changing. JJ: Right? Who holds the purse strings. That's big. Who gets to green light the show to begin with? You have to have a variety of different faces inside of that room. And then, who's behind the camera. What is the actual perspective that we're telling the story from? The male gaze thing is very real. Dr. Death had three female directors. The central character of Dr. Death is an outrageously toxic male figure. Who knows more about toxic male BS than women? Particularly women who are in a predominantly male work environment. So these directors had a very specific take and came at it with a clarity that potentially a man wouldn't see, because we have blind spots about ourselves. We're in a space where there's a recognition that we've told a very narrow band of what's available in stories. There's so many stories to be told and it's okay for us to broaden out from another white cop.

I hope that momentum continues. Okay, I have to tell you something: I’m a little obsessed with your wife, Jodie Turner-Smith. JJ: Me too. As you should be! I love how loudly and publicly you both love on each other. But I need you to set the scene for me. When you are leaving flirty Instagram comments, and she's tweeting thirsty things about you, are you in the same room? Do you know that the other one is tweeting? What's happening?

JJ: We're rarely in the same room [writing] the thirsty comments because that usually just gets said to each other. But, look, if either of us misses a comment, you better believe at night, there's a, "Hey, did you see what I wrote?" One, she's very easy to love out loud and two, she's phenomenal. And I have to say, the love and support that is coming my direction has been a revelation in my life. I've said this often, and it just is the truth: If you ever needed to test whether or not you had chosen the right partner in life, just have a baby at the beginning of a pandemic and then spend a year and a half together. And then you know. And then you absolutely know. I didn't get married until fairly late in the game. I didn't have a baby till very late in the game and they're the two best choices I've ever made in my life.

I'm just going to embarrass you now by reading one of Jodie's thirsty comments to you. She tweeted, “Objectifying my husband on the internet is my kink. I thought you guys knew this by now,” with a gif that said "No shame." JJ: [laughs] That sounds about right.

She's not the only one though. There's this whole thirst for Joshua Jackson corner of the internet. And it feels like there's been a bit of a heartthrob resurgence for you now at your big age. How do you feel about that?

JJ: I hadn't really put too much thought into it, but I am happy that my wife is thirsty for me. What about the rest of us? JJ: That's great for y'all, but it's most important that my wife is thirsty for me. Good answer. You're good at this husband thing. You recently revealed that Jodie proposed to you. Then it became this big story, and people were so surprised by it. How did you feel about the response? JJ: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to give context to this story. So I accidentally threw my wife under the bus because that story was told quickly and it didn't give the full context and holy Jesus, the internet is racist and misogynist. So yes, we were in Nicaragua on a beautiful moonlit night, it could not possibly have been more romantic. And yes, my wife did propose to me and yes, I did say yes, but what I didn't say in that interview was there was a caveat, which is that I'm still old school enough that I said, "This is a yes, but you have to give me the opportunity [to do it too]." She has a biological father and a stepdad, who's the man who raised her. [I said], ‘You have to give me the opportunity to ask both of those men for your hand in marriage.’ And then, ‘I would like the opportunity to re-propose those to you and do it the old fashioned way down on bended knee.’ So, that's actually how the story ended up.

So, there were two proposals. I do feel like that is important context. JJ: Yes, two proposals. And also for anybody who is freaked out by a woman claiming her own space, shut the fuck up. Good God, you cannot believe the things people were leaving my wife on Instagram. She did it. I said ‘yes.’ We're happy. That's it. That's all you need to know. That has been a real education for me as a white man, truly. The way people get in her comments and the ignorance and ugliness that comes her way is truly shocking. And it has been a necessary, but an unpleasant education in just the way people relate to Black bodies in general, but Black female bodies in specific. It is not okay. We have a long way to go. Jodie is such an inspiration because it seems like she handles it in stride. She handles it all with humour and with grace. JJ: She does. And look, I think it's like a golden cage, the concept of the strong Black woman. I would wish for my wife that she would not have to rise above with such amazing strength and grace, above the ugliness that people throw at her on a day to day. I am impressed with her that she does it, but I would wish that that would not be the armour that she has to put on every morning to just navigate being alive. That's a word. That's a word, Joshua Jackson.

The 13-year-old in me needs to ask this. We are in the era of reboots. If they touched Dawson's Creek — which is a masterpiece that should not be touched — but if they did, what would you want it to look like? JJ: I think it should look a lot like it looked the first time. To me, what was great about that story was it was set in a not cool place. It wasn't New York, it wasn't LA, it wasn't London. It wasn't like these were kids who were on the cutting edge of culture, but they were kids just dealing with each other and they were also very smart and capable of expressing themselves. It's something that I loved at that age performing it. And I think that is the reason it has lived on. We have these very reductive ideas of what you're capable of at 16, 17, 18. And my experience of myself at that point was not as a two-dimensional jock or nerd or pretty girl. You are living potentially an even more full life at that point because everything's just so heightened. [Dawson’s Creek] never talked down to the people that it was portraying. That's one of the things that I loved about it as a book nerd growing up. The vocabulary of Dawson's Creek was always above my level and that was refreshing. To go back to the “diversity” conversation, you can't really make a show with six white leads anymore and that’s a good thing. But I also don't know how I feel about taking a thing, rebooting it, and just throwing Black characters in there.

JJ: I hear that. And there's certain contexts in which it doesn't work unless you're making it a thing about race, right? If you watch Bridgerton, obviously you're living inside of a fantasy world, and so you're bringing Black characters into this traditionally white space and what would historically be a white space. And now you are able to have a conversation about myth-making and inclusion and who gets to say what and who gets to act how. So that's interesting, but I don’t think you’re just throwing in a Black character if you changed Joey to a Black woman [or] Pacey to a Black man. What you're doing is you're enriching the character. Let's say one of those characters is white and one of those characters is Black. Now, there's a whole rich conversation to be had between these two kids, the political times that we live in, the cultural flow that is going through all of us right now. I think that makes a better story. All these conversations around comic books in particular like, "Well, that's a white character." It's like, Man, shut up. What are you talking about? It is a comic book character! Joey and Pacey don't have to be white. Dawson and Jen don't have to be white. And this is what we were talking about a little bit earlier. We get better the broader our perspective is, both as humans, but also in the entertainment industry. So if you went back to a story like [Dawson’s Creek], what was important in that show was class not race, which I think is true for a lot of small Northeastern towns. They are very white. But if you brought race into that as well, you don't diminish the amount of the stories that you can tell. You enrich the tapestry of that show. So I think that would be a great idea.

Make Pacey Witter a Black man in 2021 is what I just heard from you. JJ: Hashtag ‘Make Pacey Witter A Black Man’. There we go!

#joshua jackson #refinery29 #interviews #jodie turner smith #dawson's creek

23 notes · View notes

bananaofswifts · 3 years

Link

Taylor Swift appears to be waging war over the serial resale of her old master recordings on two fronts. She recently confirmed that she is already underway in the process of re-recording the six albums she made for the Big Machine label, in order to steer her fans (and sync licensing execs) toward the coming alternate versions she’ll control. But now that she’s followed the surprise release of “Folklore” with the very, very surprise release of “Evermore” less than five months later, the thought may occur: If she keeps up this pace, she may have more new albums out on the Republic label than she ever did on Big Machine in a quarter of the time. Flooding the zone to further crowd out the oldies is unlikely to be Swift’s real motivation for giving the world a full-blown “Folklore” sequel this instantaneously: As motivations for prolific activity go, relieving and sublimating quarantine pressure is probably even better than revenge. Anyway, this is not a gift horse to be looked in the mouth. “Evermore,” like its mid-pandemic predecessor, feels like something that’s been labored over — in the best possible way — for years, not something that was written and recorded beginning in August, with the bow said to be put on it only about a week ago. Albums don’t get graded on a curve for how hastily they came together, or shouldn’t be, but this one doesn’t need the handicap. It’d be a jewel even if it’d been in progress forevermore and a day.The closest analog for the relation the new album bears to its predecessor might be one that’d seem ancient to much of Swift’s audience: U2 following “Achtung Baby” with “Zooropa” while still touring behind the previous album. It’s hard to remember now that a whole year and a half separated those two related projects; In that very different era, it seemed like a ridiculously fast follow-up. But the real comparison lies in how U2, having been rewarded for making a pretty gutsy change of pace with “Achtung,” seemed to say: You’re okay with a little experimentation? Let’s see how you like it when we really boil things down to our least commercial impulses, then — while we’ve still got you in the mood.Swift isn’t going avant-garde with “Evermore.” If anything, she’s just stripping things down to even more of an acoustic core, so that the new album often sounds like the folk record that the title of the previous one promised — albeit with nearly subliminal layers of Mellotrons, flutes, French horns and cellos that are so well embedded beneath the profuse finger-picking, you probably won’t notice them till you scour the credits. But it’s taking the risk of “Folklore” one step further by not even offering such an obvious banger (irony intended) as “Cardigan.” Aaron Dessner of the National produced or co-produced about two-thirds of the last record, but he’s on 14 out of 15 tracks here (Jack Antonoff gets the remaining spot), and so the new album is even more all of a piece with his arpeggiated chamber-pop impulses, Warmth amid iciness is a recurring lyrical motif here, and kind of a musical one, too, as Swift’s still increasingly agile vocal acting breathes heat into arrangements that might otherwise seem pretty controlled. At one point Swift sings, “Hey, December, I’m feeling unmoored,” like a woman who might even know she’s going to put her album out a couple of weeks before Christmas. It’s a wintry record — suitable for double-cardigan wearing! — and if you’re among the 99% who have been feeling unmoored, too, then perhaps you are Ready For It. Swift said in announcing the album that she was moving further into fiction songwriting after finding out it was a good fit on much of “Folklore,” a probably inevitable move for someone who’s turning 31 in a few days and appears to have a fairly settled personal life. Which is not to say that there aren’t scores to settle, and a few intriguing tracks whose real-life associations will be speculated upon. But just as the “Betty”/”August” love triangle of mid-year established that modern pop’s most celebrated confessional writer can just make shit up, too, so, here, do we get the narrator of “Dorothea,” a honey in Tupelo who is telling a childhood friend who moved away and became famous that she’s always welcome back in her hometown. (Swift may be doing a bit of empathic wondering in a couple of tracks here how it feels to be at the other end of the telescope.) One time the album takes a turn away from rumination into a pure spirit of fun — while getting dark anyway — is “No Body, No Crime,” a spirited double-murder ballad that may have more than a little inspiration in “Goodbye, Earl.” Since Swift already used the Dixie Chicks for background vocals two albums ago, for this one she brings in two of the sisters from Haim, Danielle and Este, and even uses the latter’s name for one of the characters. Yes, the rock band Haim’s featured appearance is on the only really country-sounding song on the record… there’s one you didn’t see coming, in the 16 hours you had to wonder about it. Yet there are also a handful of songs that clearly represent a Swiftian state of mind. At least, it’s easy to suppose that the love songs that opens the album, “Willow,” is a cousin to the previous record’s “Invisible String” and “Peace,” even if it doesn’t offer quite as many clearly corroborating details about her current relationship as those did. On the sadder side, Swift is apparently determined to run through her entire family tree for heartrending material. On “Lover,” she sang for her stricken mother; on “Folklore,” for her grandfather in wartime. In that tradition the new album offers “Marjorie,” about the beloved grandmother she lost in 2003, when she was 13. (The lyric videos that are being offered online mostly offer static visual loops, but the one for “Marjorie” is an exception, reviving a wealth of stills and home-movie footage of Grandma, who was quite a looker in a miniskirt in her day.) Rue is not something Swift is afraid of here anymore than anywhere else, as she sings, “I should’ve asked you questions / I should’ve asked you how to be / Asked you to write it down for me / Should’ve kept every grocery store receipt / ‘Cause every scrap of you would be taken from me,” lines that will leave a dry eye only in houses that have never known death. The piece de resistance in its poignance is Swift actually resurrecting faint audio clips of Marjorie, who was an opera singer back in the day. It’s almost like ELO’s “Rockaria,” played for weeping instead of a laugh. Swift has not given up, thank God, on the medium that brought her to the dance — the breakup song — but most of them here have more to do with dimming memories and the search for forgiveness, however slowly and incompletely achieved, than feist. But doesn’t Swift know that we like her when she’s angry? She does, and so she delves deep into something like venom just once, but it’s a good one. The ire in “Closure,” a pulsating song about an unwelcome “we can still be friends, right?” letter from an ex, seems so fresh and close to the surface that it would be reasonable to speculate that it is not about a romantic relationship at all, but a professional one she has no intention of ever recalling in a sweet light. Or maybe she does harbor that a disdain for an actual former love with that machinelike a level of intensity. What “Evermore” is full of is narratives that, like the music that accompanies them, really come into focus on second or third listen, usually because of a detail or two that turns her sometimes impressionistic modes completely vivid. “Champagne Problems” is a superb example of her abilities as a storyteller who doesn’t always tell all: She’s playing the role of a woman who quickly ruins a relationship by balking at a marriage proposal the guy had assumed was an easy enough yes that he’d tipped off his nearby family. “Sometimes you just don’t know the answer ‘ Til someone’s on their knees and asks you / ‘She would’ve made such a lovely bride / What a shame she’s fucked in the head’ / They said / But you’ll find the real thing instead / She’ll patch up your tapestry that I shred.” (Swift has doubled the F-bomb quotient this time around, among other expletives, for anyone who may be wondering whether there’s rough wordplay amid Dessner’s delicacy — that would an effing yes.) “‘Tis the Damn Season,” representing a gentler expletive, gives us a character who is willing to settle, or at least share a Christmas-time bed with an ex back in the hometown, till something better comes along. The pleasures here are shared, though not many more fellow artists have broken into her quarantine bubble this time around. Besides Haim’s cameo, Marcus Mumford offers a lovely harmony vocal on “Cowboy Like Me,” which might count as the other country song on the album, and even throws in something Swift never much favored in her Nashville days, a bit of lap steel. Its tale of male and female grifters meeting and maybe — maybe — falling in love is really more determinedly Western than C&W, per se, though. The National itself, as a group, finally gets featured billing on “Coney Island,” with Matt Berninger taking a duet vocal on a track that recalls the previous album’s celebrated Bon Iver collaboration “Exile,” with ex-lovers taking quiet turns deciding who was to blame. (Swift saves the rare laugh line for herself: “We were like the mall before the internet / It was the one place to be.) Don’t worry, legions of new Bon Iver fans: Dessner has not kicked Justin Vernon out of his inner circle just to make room for Berninger. The Bon Iver frontman whose appearance on “Folklore” came as a bit of a shock to some of his fan base actually makes several appearances on this album, and the one that gets him elevated to featured status again, as a duet, the closing “Evermore,” is different from “Exile” in two key ways. Vernon gets to sing in his high register… and he gets the girl. As it turned out, the year 2020 did not involve any such waiting for Swift fans; it’s an embarrassment of stunning albums-ending-in-“ore” that she’s mined out of a locked-down muse.

#taylor swift #evermore #review

130 notes · View notes

earthstellar · 3 years

Text

TFP Megatronus x Orion Pax Experimental Concept Playlist: The Timescale of Cybertronian Lives + Music from 1890 - 2021

I know there are tons of playlists for these characters out there, but I’m trying to do something a little less conventional with this one; Please hear me out!

Two Playlists in One: Love Throughout The Ages

The first half of this playlist is almost all new music mixed in with some hits from the 60s, 70s, 80s, etc. to give variety, plus tracks from different genres so that hopefully everyone has a song they can enjoy in there somewhere.

For the second half of the playlist, I wanted to emphasise the idea of how long the war on Cybertron has been going on for, and just how old this conflict and the people involved actually are.

Cybertronian Timescale: Long Lives and The Perception of Time

We think of the Orion Pax / Megatronus stage of their relationship as being relatively brief, which it was in comparison to how long the war has been going on for as of TFP, but these are people who live for centuries. The scope of that is staggering.

Optimus Prime and Megatron have known each other personally (either positively or negatively) for longer than modern human civilisation has existed.

So to me, the best way to touch on that idea of time, musically, is to have the first half of the playlist be modern music, remixes, etc. and then the second half is well known and lesser known hits throughout early radio/TV (with many tracks on this playlist pre-dating those forms of media as well).

What’s on the Playlist, Then?

My grandmother was born in 1914, and her music collection spans nearly 100 years. It’s all good stuff.

I have included some of her favourites, which she always called her “sweetheart jingles”, on this soundtrack. I think many of them work surprisingly well for the Megatronus/Orion Pax relationship.

Many of these songs will probably be unknown by the vast majority of people who might want to listen to this playlist, which is also appealing to me. (I hope if this is your first time hearing some of these, that you enjoy a few of them!)

My parents were born in 1944, and I remember all of the classics they would play; Some of those tracks will be more recognisable as this was the era when radio and TV became far more common and accessible, but I picked the tracks that I think best apply to the pairing and the relationship between the two characters at that point in their lives.

The link to the playlist is below after some notes on Cybertronian language evolution!

Quick Thought: Cybertronian Language Over Time and Era Specific Speech Patterns

While thinking about my grandmother’s music collection as I assembled this playlist, I thought about some of the words and phrases she used commonly that are now totally non-existent in modern conversational English.

She had what would probably sound to most people like “1930s radio voice” or a more Trans-Atlantic Accent way of speaking; She grew up in the Northeast USA and so she had a very distinctive way of stressing the vowels in words. It’s not just the words themselves, or how they were pronounced, but the tone and pace of speech was also very different.

This got me thinking about Cybertronians, age, and speech:

Bots as old as Ratchet may have grown up with a totally different spoken language version of Cybertronian, and we already know that there are regional dialects, multiple written forms (glyphs), and era-specific types of Cybertronian language.

But the way they speak, as I mentioned above with the stressing of vowels and the tone and pace of speech, might still be different due to the different eras, even after language packs/programs are downloaded and updated periodically as needed. We already know Cybertronians have regional accents, so it stands that generational accents would also possibly exist as well.

Such a difference in speech patterns could possibly be used as a primary indicator of relative age on Cybertron, as physically they don’t age in the sense human beings do.

Back to the Playlist: Link + Track List + Notes on Audio Prior to 1930

The playlist is here on YouTube.

Scroll down to get to the second half (oldies section) if that’s what you’re here for!

Please note that the songs are not arranged in any particular order aside from the first half being newer music and the second half being far older music.

Also note, where original recordings are available on YouTube for some of the older songs, I have used those original recording versions.

However, keep in mind that there may be a couple seconds of “fuzz” at the top (start) of those older tracks, because they have been recorded from records or wax cylinders, which are formats of music that typically had a “pause” on the track to allow for needle and speed calibration when playing them manually. Modern records don’t do this in quite the same way and nobody uses wax cylinders anymore, but older records typically did. If this bothers you, skip ahead about two seconds or so, and it will resolve.

Tempo may seem slightly “fast” on two of the tracks due to difficulties with the medium and modern recording tech/methods, and one track has some persistent “fuzz” throughout due to the original recording being rare and therefore it is a “best copy available” type archival recording, but otherwise I’ve managed to find the clearest audio possible for the vast majority of the older songs!

(Fun music note, the “click track” in modern digital music was partially inspired by the clicking of the needle hitting the “countdown grooves” on old cylinders and records, which creates an audible mild clicking sound as the needle finds the groove and provides time for usually a half rotation or full rotation of the record before the track actually begins to allow for adjustment before the music starts! If the clicking is too fast, dial down the rotation speed, for example.

This itself was inspired by classical metronomes as well as the actual physical method of playing the music in this way, but it’s cool to see how this persists throughout musical history even now when we don’t need the click for digital production for quite the same reasons/applications. It’s all about timing, no matter the medium or era!)

Due to the method of how some player piano rolls were credited, often by roll company and not by individuals, the actual artist name is often not available for those tracks. Where possible and where known, I have included credits to the artists/musicians. I have done my best to research and find the artists in these recordings.

I have also included orchestrions and other “automated” music in addition to a player piano track as I think it’s interesting; These are often very old compositions being played on these machines, and as such are designed to reflect the earliest days of their relationship.

Songs range from the years 1890 to 2021, and I will add more as I manage to find YouTube videos with some of the older songs I’m still looking for.

By the way, if you need a love song for like an actual partner or crush that you have, I’m just going to say it now and point out that a lot of these classics are great to use in real life for cute purposes. My partner of ten years agrees, and my grandparents were married for over 60 years and sang many of these daily, so obviously something here works well. You’re welcome. ;)

Below the cut is a track list of the second half of the playlist, as it’s 7 AM and I’d like to emphasise the “classics” section here as it’s the central theme of the concept.

I will add to this list as more tracks are added:

You’re the Top - Cole Porter

What is this Thing Called Love - Leslie Hutchinson

I Get a Kick Outta You - Cole Porter

Puttin on the Ritz - Phil Spitalny Orchestra

What a Day - Carl Fenton

Come Fly With Me - Frank Sinatra

Earth Angel - The Penguins

Ring a Ding Ding - Frank Sinatra

In my Merry Oldsmobile - Billy Murray

Singin in the Rain - Gene Kelly

Dream a Little Dream of Me - Doris Day

Unforgettable - Nat King Cole

Can’t Help Falling in Love - Elvis Presley

Good Golly Miss Molly - Little Richard

Bei Mir Bist du Schoen - The Andews Sisters

Shine on Harvest Moon - Ruth Etting

1920s Dance Sequence from Don’t Knock the Rock

In the Mood -Glen Miller Orchestra

Dream Lover - Bobby Darin

When the Ragtime Army Goes Away to War (Artist Unknown)

After You’ve Gone - J. Lawrence Cook

My Sin (Artist Unknown)

Flick Flack by Albert Vossen (Unsure; Song + Artist Unknown; Orchestrion)

Lotosblumen Walzer by E. Ohlsen (Hupfeld Violina)

Waltz no.2 - Dmitri Shostakovich

Jupiter - Gustav Holst

Love Potion no. 9 - The Clovers (Please note, this song mentions the word “g*psy” once in the beginning of the track. Skip this song if you would prefer not to hear it; I have done my best to only include songs that are friendly to the modern listener, but where needed I will make annotations such as this one to ensure nobody has to hear anything potentially offensive, as is unfortunately often the case with older music/lyrics.)

Come a Little Bit Closer - Jay and the Americans

Sh-Boom - The Crew Cuts

Oh Boy - Buddy Holly

#long post #playlist #megop #megops #cybertronian culture #transformers #transformers prime #tfp #maccadam #maccadams #megatron #optimus prime #orion pax #music #concept playlist #megatronus

35 notes · View notes

podcake · 6 years

Text

Podcasts & Genre: Noir

When one thinks of the noir genre, the most common association is film noir, a style of film making sparking in popularity many, meany years ago but still carries some relevance today. Though no one really makes genuine noir films anymore, unless you count a few with noir inspired elements, noir mostly lives on strictly as short parodies while mystery stories stay as mystery stories without the usual aesthetic qualities you’d identify a noir film with.

Noir brings up ideas of stylishly produced, sexual, and cynical stories sparking during the 1940′s that normally focus on a detective that one might describe as hardboiled, a femme fatale or two, and some type of mystery plot to tackle, often involving murder.

One of the core reasons noir is mostly treated with a certain level of parody in modern work is due to how dramatic these productions could be. The whole vibe of theatrics that came from these productions could be perceived as laughable nowadays. Though much like Broadway musicals could be given a massive reboot through the success of Wicked and later the phenomena of Hamilton, the same could be said for noir that will occasionally slip its way into more modern interpretations while still maintaining an authentic narrative.

While this is fairly evident in film, we all know that things with more than one picture attached to it isn’t really my specialty. You’re here to hear things and then read about the things you heard. How can sound effectively get an idea across when we only have our imaginations and common sense to tell things apart?

As a whole, this article will be delving into the complexity of translating genre through sound with noir being the main focal point due to its rarity and presence in a different medium of entertainment.

This might just be a theory though I believe that noir managed to flow pretty well into the audio drama realm mostly because one of the most vital parts of these films is a consistent narration. This aspect alone is oddly enough the real driving force behind noir getting a second life.

And yet I do realize that noir is a kind of genre that is very selectively put to use. It’s relatively rare for a new noir show to pop up, only ever making common occurrences around early to late 2016. Rex Rivetter: Private Eye and Neon Nights: The Arcane Files both debuted the same year with only a few months difference between their publications.

The same could be said for The Penumbra that came out in March. If this is merely a coincidence or not is on the table as all of the shows came from different producers and are essentially different products in their entirety.

These shows are not the only podcast noir shows in existence, though it’s hard to ignore just how few their are in comparison to the abundance of horror and sci-fi shows that come out every few months.

Among these, The Penumbra and it’s tales of private eye Juno Steel are the most openly successful. The Penumbra takes a creative approach to both the noir genre, with a helpful touch of sci fi, and the fantasy-adventure genre in their Second Citadel series. But if we are to focus on Juno Steel stories in particular, it’s not hard to see why it’s gotten such positive press.

Normally taking place over the course of two part episodes, Juno Steel delivers some strongly written individual mysteries that work their way up to being a whole story with recurring characters and an intriguing central plot. We get some colorful one shot villains, a likable though also dysfunctional lead, and a touch of romance that works to reveal the character’s personal insecurities.

The Penumbra’s specialty is to remix and retell classic story genres with a touch of modern edge and originality that lets them stand as great individual stories and joins The Bright Sessions and Wolf 359 as some of the most well known modern fiction podcasts.

A little while later came Neon Nights and Rex Rivetter that I combed through back to back to form a proper opinion on. Though they’ll most definitely be the topics of some future reviews, I do enjoy the air of the occult with Neon Nights which gives it a sort of Dresden Files vibe and Rex Rivetter that’s a touch more old fashioned through presentation which gives it a certain air of glamour that is sometimes delightfully camp.

The newest contender for the noir genre is What’s The Frequency? which has already made quite the splash in this mostly independent art community with a strong first episode that left a lot to the imagination. Though I’ve always liked the level of absurdity that the noir genre can dig up while still maintaining an air of mystery, What’s The Frequency? is one of the most downright bizarre products to come out in recent memory that’s equal parts eerie and engaging.

What’s The Frequency? truly commits to the style with its innovative use of static and the inclusion of voice work that invokes just the right vibe of psychedelic 1940′s it’s aiming for. It truly does feel old unlike the usual crisp and clean audio we get from the previously mentioned work.

Something that has fascinated me is that when you take the film out of film noir you still get a genuine experience. Even without the gray scale, even without the crafty use of silhouettes and dramatic framework, noir has managed to ooze itself into the crevices of fictional podcasts from a purely audio based perspective.

This I perceive as interesting as noir is noteworthy for its creative cinematography-Dutch angles, night-for-night shots, and silhouettes being the most common. Not to mention clothing like the iconic trench coat and hat approach, women with lipstick we could all assume was red, and people in formal dress for the sake of making every second look as classy as the last.

With podcasts, we only have so much time to get a visual across to listeners without loading them up with pointless filler, most of the run time consisting of dialogue meant to push the story forward to a conclusion. Though audio drama certainly isn’t limited to a purely linear story structure, it does have to pull through a bit more in certain aspects such as writing, sound editing, and acting to hold someone’s attention.

While film gives us more visual shorthand and generally does the settings and characters for us, audio drama leans heavily on getting its story out first and letting the listener fill in the blanks. In audio, visuals are an afterthought but imagery is still roughly where half of the writing effort goes into. It is much easier to look pretty than to sound pretty and this is why podcasts tend to be more ambitious since they can do more with less.

All of these individual shows have some sort of unique quality that gives it its rightful spot as separate stories, and yet you’d be hard pressed not to describe them as noir. Noir is so grounded in film that the idea of translating it to a purely audio based format almost seems to go against what noir is supposed to be, and yet we never run into these complications when we stumble upon them.

We can still identify a horror show without visual blood splatters and can still consider a sci-fi a sci-fi even if we never actually see the interior of a space ship we’re inside of. For example, Wolf 359 is very much science fiction with some strong comedy writing, though it’s also an entirely different beast than Hadron Gospel Hour that may be in the same boat but clearly going up a different stream.

Audio Diary of a Superhero and The Bright Sessions both tackle ideas of disability outweighed by extraordinary power, and yet it’d be near impossible to get the two mixed up. Presentation and packaging can really make or break a show and how one plans to get these ideas across is the real definitive element at hand.

While, let’s say for now, horror and science fiction don’t have any definitive visuals, only some recurring ones, noir is different in that it’s almost entirely built on a very specific list of cliches for it to be truly considered part of that group. You kind of need murder, you kind of need a detective, you kind of need a morally ambiguous seductress-so in that vain, noir can very much exist without the usual attributes as long as the audio can get these ideas across.

But let’s say, hypothetically, that these tropes aren’t being put to use. How exactly does one gain the right to consider their story a noir? Well from my understanding, these shows have leaned on a few common trends: a deep voiced protagonist with a definitive, world weary perspective, a jazz score, and taking place in a stylish but troubled city where all the conflict boils.

It’s truly here that the idea of style and substance, narrative and aesthetic, play into one another for the better.

Since this article is one part history lesson and another part describing things that are barley a year old, I do feel the need to dig up some facts. A detail many tend to forget is that audio drama was a vital form of entertainment years ago, it getting its start on nighttime radio broadcasts that were tuned into the same way we would watch prime time TV.

Though this type of entertainment hasn’t entirely died, the radio part of radio drama has leaned more towards desktop computer drama or smartphone drama if we’re going to be taking about technology specifically.

The thing is that podcasts got a hard reboot when Welcome to Night Vale reminded people how cool that was and everyone followed Joseph Fink and Jeffery Cranor’s breadcrumbs to make their own stories that were slightly less time consuming than writing a book and less expensive than making a movie.

The strive for authenticity is strong in any artistic medium and podcasts are no exception. We may have our trends and sometimes repetitive structures and dynamics surfacing every few years, though the final product is what really gives anything its identity. What we consider truly authentic for anything or anyone can be boiled down to aesthetic value, narrative value, or something else entirely depending on your perspective.

The same could be said for me as the whole purpose of Podcasts& is essentially to cover topics with a little more complexity than I’m normally able to. Reviews are restricted to whatever podcasts I managed to finish and pair up on slim similarities, Teatimes have the creators do most of the talking, and Palettes, one of the main support beams of the PodCake empire, are the equivalent of a “best of” reel-a first impressions, if you will. All the while I keep things interesting with flower emoticons and some cute girls over a pink backdrop. These are certainly accessories to my persona, though not the entirety of my work.

With Podcasts&, we’re given just a little more time to look back and breathe in just what audio drama is capable of. If there’s anything about this medium that has fascinated me it’s the way it can transcend the typical confides of storytelling to still give a satisfying and unique experience. Many audio dramas exist in the same subgroups but I’m hard pressed to find any that are near identical to one another.

Be it The Penumbra or Neon Nights-they may be fruit bared from the same garden, but their taste and textures are clearly being grown from different kinds of people. What makes each one interesting is that while noir is normally considered an exercise in creatively crafted footage, audio still manages to capture its identity and mood nonetheless. Noir audio dramas have to flex a little more muscle to really get their aesthetic qualities to matter since that is what defines their genre in the fist place.

Interesting how these articles tend to tie into one another.

As I get to the conclusion of this editorial, I realize I have opened up a whole new can of worms when dealing with genre construction that is such a broad topic that I’ll need more than one text document to talk about it. Maybe some other day in some other month when all the Palettes and reviews are done and I can work up something proper worthy of being the first article of the new year.

We can discuss comedy and horror and science fiction and surrealism. We can talk about all that has come of it and how there is no one way to tell a tale or represent a genre.

So consider this little piece a...prelude for what is to come. Let’s talk about history, let’s talk about audio entertainment in its entirety, let’s bookmark Wikipedia articles, because the topic of genre is barely even at its peak when it comes to noir, though the fact that it exists at all says something about what just a few sounds are capable of.

#podcast #audio drama #audio play #radio play #what's the frequency #the penumbra podcast #neon nights the arcane files of jack tracer #rex rivetter private eye #wolf 359 #audio diary of superhero #hadron gospel hour #welcome to night vale #podcasts and #genre parlor

339 notes · View notes

lifeonashelf · 3 years

Text

COBAIN, KURT

Dying was definitely the worst thing that ever happened to Kurt Cobain.

That may not read like a particularly brilliant statement. You’re saying: “Taylor, I’m sure if you solicited any random sampling of people to compile a list of the worst things they could imagine happening to them, dying would end up at the top of most of those lists” (although, it would land below “being married to Courtney Love” on mine). However, the reasons I’m positing this in regards to Cobain are only tangentially related to the most common side effect of death being an immediate cessation of one’s mortal presence on this earth. Explanation: Cobain’s too-short life was characterized by profound and abiding existential pain, so in his specific instance I presume ending that life at least came with the not-unwelcome corollary of providing a respite from his suffering. Besides, the manner of his death left ample evidence that he sincerely did not want to be alive anymore, so it’s unlikely he was overly concerned with side effects. In case there’s any misconception that I’m somehow endorsing Kurt Cobain’s suicide, please feel free to text me and I’ll gladly forward you a selfie so you can see the tears that are filling my eyes right now as I revisit the devastating final chapter of a man whose music means the world to me. Yet, somehow, the strip-mining of his memory that began the very day his body was found strikes me as a tragedy which nearly equals what was done to that body.

Tucked away on one of my shelves, you will find a bootleg box set entitled Into the Black (I mean that figuratively; you will not find it—if you really want to see it, I will get it down for you; seriously, don’t start touching my shit). I procured this anthology upon its release in 1994, and back then it had the distinction of being the richest available source of previously-unreleased Nirvana live performances and songs that were never included on any of their albums. Such a find would be largely meaningless today, when a quick internet search can immediately unearth all of those tracks within seconds. But for a distraught fan to whom the prospect of facing a world where there would never be any new Nirvana music again seemed unbearable, Into the Black was an immensely cathartic salve for me at a time when I desperately needed it. The scope of the compendium remains impressive—I think it’s a way better collection than the official With the Lights Out box set that came out 10 years later—and by presenting the included material in chronological order, all the way from Nirvana’s first demo cassette to a complete recording of their final North American concert, the seven hours of tunes on Into the Black provide about the most fitting and comprehensive Kurt Cobain encomium ever delivered.

Which is part of what makes the final track on the anthology arrive like a dagger to the soul and the ears. There really isn’t a name for this closing selection—after all, it isn’t even a song. But the creators of Into the Black had to call it something in the track listing. So they called it exactly what it is: “Courtney Love’s Complete Eulogy For Kurt Cobain.”

This recording was played for a crowd of several thousand despondent fans who gathered in Seattle for a public memorial on April 10, 1994, two days after Cobain’s body was found. Its manifestation occupies a limbo unique to itself, half significant historical document, half ghoulish tabloid spectacle. Though the song “Miss World” was released on March 28, in a very real sense, it was this Courtney Love recital that served as the first proper single from Hole’s Live Through This, which would be released forty-eight hours later and subsequently propel her music career to previously unthinkable heights—a result that arguably stemmed as much from Love’s deft public navigation of her grief process as it did from the fact that Live Through This is a fucking incredible record.

Reactions to “Eulogy” (for lack of a better title) will inevitably vary by listener. If you view Courtney Love as an unfortunate casualty of Kurt Cobain’s war against himself, you will probably hear a shell-shocked widow valiantly facing her worst nightmare. If you view Courtney Love as one of the likely reasons Cobain loaded his shotgun on April 5, 1994, you will probably hear an unhinged harpy using the most intimate words her late husband ever wrote against him in a monstrously demeaning fashion. Over time, I’ve come to rest somewhere in the middle of those two poles, so I don’t quite know what to make of the recording now. What I do know is that I never want to listen to it again, and don’t really need to since it’s still vividly burned into my brain from past spins—I couldn’t bring myself to revisit it while authoring this segment about it. Because even in 1994 when I was playing Into the Black endlessly, even when I was struggling to make sense of something that seemed utterly senseless, and even when the message Love was delivering was allegedly intended for anguished fans just like me, my reaction to that audio was exactly the same as I assume it would be today: I shouldn’t be hearing this.

“Eulogy” essentially features Courtney Love narrating Cobain’s suicide note in its entirety. Since photographs of the document have subsequently surfaced in numerous places, a cursory review plainly reveals that despite Love’s proclamation on the tape that she elected to omit parts of the letter about herself and their daughter Frances “because they’re none of your fucking business”, she does in fact share nearly everything that appears on the page. Irrespective of that, her rationalization is a bizarre one—after all, it can be sensibly argued that nothing in that epistle was really the “fucking business” of anyone outside Cobain’s immediate circle. The mere reading itself denotes a sort of indecent invasion, but it is the peculiar spin the author’s self-appointed spokeswoman put on the broadcast that truly makes it astonishing. Love didn’t simply orate Cobain’s note, she annotated it, interjecting frequently to pose her own biting counterpoints to his words, sometimes leveling these ripostes directly at him, sometimes addressing her running commentary to the royal listening we. Her delivery veers between naked tear-choked agony that will move you no matter how you feel about her, and primal hissing vitriol—at one point on the recording she instructs the entire crowd to call the man they came to mourn “asshole.” It is the sound of a woman purging an entire spectrum of very private emotions in a very public way, it is an unseemly peek under the mortuary drape of a man who had just shot a gaping hole in the hearts of millions, and it is extremely uncomfortable to listen to.

I do not know Courtney Love. I have no desire to know Courtney Love. Only she could tell you how actively she calculated the channeling of her deceased husband’s musical legacy into the birth of her own. I cannot definitively state that Courtney Love exploited Kurt Cobain’s death to make herself famous; it’s not nearly that simple. I can state this again, because it’s true: Live Through This is a fucking amazing record, and it probably would have been a next-level hit even without the supernatural timing of its arrival and the uncanny way several of its key tracks seemed to capture what all of us who were shattered by Cobain’s suicide were feeling at that moment in time. But regardless of her intentions, the transmission she delivered at the Seattle Center on April 10, 1994 was undeniably indecorous. The very circumstance of it feels wrong, and witnessing it via that recording feels even worse. I didn’t want to know what that note said. I wish I didn’t know what that note said. And I wish I could listen to Live Through This—which is, to reiterate, SUCH A FUCKING GREAT RECORD—without inescapably pinpointing it as the moment Courtney Love became the first person to strike gold at Kurt Cobain’s gravesite.

Unfortunately, that was only the beginning of the excavation.

Elsewhere in my apartment, on the bookcase directly to the right of the desk at which I’m sitting, you will also find no fewer than six biographies about Nirvana. In relation to the sum of available material, my library isn’t even close to complete; after a while, I stopped buying every associated text as they were published (once you read a half-dozen volumes about a band that only existed for a half-dozen years, redundancy becomes an issue—also, reading about Nirvana is always a dispiriting experience because no matter how good the book is, you’re inevitably going to reach THAT chapter eventually). Filed next to those is Cobain, a coffee table book which assembles almost every Nirvana-related article that appeared in Rolling Stone during their career. And directly beside that rests an even larger coffee table book entitled Journals. Kurt Cobain is the credited author, which I suppose makes sense, since nearly every word therein is in his handwriting. Nevertheless, that attribution becomes difficult to digest when you consider that the tome was released in 2002—given that Cobain had been dead for 8 years when Journals came out, I’m naturally skeptical about the scope of his involvement in the project.

I have a hard time accepting that this book exists. On one hand, the drawings, correspondence, and scribbled musings which comprise its pages offer a rare and informal glimpse into the mind of one of my favorite songwriters of all time. Yet a much larger part of me can’t discount my impression that by glimpsing these things I have in essence sneaked into Kurt Cobain’s room and picked the lock on his diary. It seems highly improbable he would have ever published this material in this form of his own volition; actually, I suspect he would have been mortified if these logs were leaked while he was alive. The justification, one would suppose, is that Cobain is a singularly iconic figure and remains an object of fascination, therefore any piece of himself he took the time to immortalize in writing has intrinsic value (even a dip recipe he got from his mom, evidently). Except the absence of his agency over this particular venture indicates that the significance of the content showcased in Journals was determined solely by outside agents. Cobain was actually fairly prolific given the brevity of his career—it would take a book roughly the same size as Journals to assemble all of the lyrics he wrote for Nirvana’s catalog. Yet, like any artist, he put most of his work through rigorous internal scrutiny and editorial refinement before he unveiled it to an audience; he was the only person who decided if and when it had value. A lot of the poetry featured in Journals was eventually funneled into Nirvana compositions; those are the pieces we can presume he was ready to share with the world—because he, you know, did share them. But when it comes to the numerous drafts of personal letters that appear throughout the tome, it seems innately obvious he did not want those to be read; if he did, he would have fucking sent them to the people they were addressed to and they wouldn’t still be present in his notebooks to be pilfered.

When the release of this relic was announced, the rabid fan in me was of course curious, and I knew this was an item I wanted in my library. But the altruistic side of me always grappled with that desire; I could never quite concur that Cobain’s inability to object constituted a license for me to read work that he chose to keep to himself. Obviously, Journals was a guaranteed best-seller, which is precisely why it was published (oh, I was never snowed by that “a way for his fans to better understand him” bullshit; I have no doubt “a way for his fans to spend money” was the primary purpose this tome was meant to serve). It certainly has intriguing bits, particularly the sections that show sketches Cobain made for early Nirvana t-shirt designs that were never produced and the numerous mixtape track-listings he itemized (sadly, due to his fondness for bands so deeply obscure they are outside the scope of even a collection as large as mine, I don’t have all the listed tunes to faithfully reproduce any of them for my own listening pleasure).

Other articles such as a grossly-gushy sweethearts note to Courtney Love and a childish screed addressed to MTV are far less interesting to me, since the only parts of Cobain they help me “better understand” are parts I already know far more about than I care to. Good and bad are basically negligible designations here anyway, since the revelatory bits and the patently trivial snippets are all culled from the same invasive pedigree. It certainly didn’t assuage my conflicted feelings about reading Journals when I opened the book and saw that the very first sentence printed in it is, “Don’t read my diary when I’m gone”… a request that becomes somewhat clouded by what Cobain wrote two lines later: “please read my diary… look through my things, and figure me out.” I did look—I looked cover to cover—but since I listened to all of Nirvana’s records long before that, I already had Kurt Cobain figured out about as much as I imagine he wanted myself or any of his fans to. A photocopy that confirms he did ordinary things like pay his phone bill doesn’t do much to augment my appreciation of all the extraordinary things he did.

By exhibiting monumental developments like Cobain’s first stab at the lyrics to “Smells Like Teen Spirit” alongside snippets of humdrum humanity like his jotting down of the 1-800 number for NordikTrack, a chronicle like Journals is ostensibly meant to show that even a man who was exalted as a demigod used to put on his Daniel Johnston shirts one sleeve at a time just like the rest of us. If so, the very existence of Journals negates its own premise, since none of its content would be considered even remotely noteworthy if said content wasn’t scribed by Kurt Cobain—which only advances the misguided hero-worship that plagued his quintessence and encumbered a future suicide victim with spiritual baggage he never welcomed nor desired. Even with my limited understanding of what Kurt Cobain’s art meant to him, I am certain he would never have wanted a book like Journals to happen. Just as I am equally certain that the inflation of his esteem to such excessive heights that his admirers would be itching to read the undisclosed documents he kept in his underwear drawer played a large part in the events of April 5, 1994.

I guess this is as good a time as any to explain why a songwriter who was never a solo artist is the subject of his own entry here—especially since I just chastised the publishers of Journals for giving him special treatment. It’s true that nearly every piece of music Cobain had his hand in was issued under the Nirvana masthead (except for that collaboration with William Burroughs I wrote about a long time ago… but I’m trying to forget that ever came out since it’s not much more enjoyable to listen to than “Eulogy”). Yet, thanks to the same vulturous machinations I’ve been recapping throughout this piece, the Kurt Cobain discography does indeed include one solo album to date. There is an itty-bitty asterisk next to that item, though:

* Kurt Cobain’s solo album came out twenty-one years after Kurt Cobain died.

Oh, and * Kurt Cobain did not participate in the making of Kurt Cobain’s solo album.

Oh, and * Kurt Cobain’s solo album is not technically an album.

Oh, also * Most of the songs on Kurt Cobain’s solo album are not actually songs.

Oh, and lastly * When Kurt Cobain recorded this solo not-album of mostly not-songs, he had no idea that anyone was ever going to hear it.

The sort-of record I’m referring to was assigned the title Montage of Heck, which is needlessly confusing for anyone familiar with Nirvana’s history, since Montage of Heck was originally the title Cobain bestowed upon one of his earliest demo cassettes. The Montage I’m examining in this essay bears no relation to that one; rather, Montage of Heck: The Home Recordings is an ill-considered compilation that was released in conjunction with a congruently-monikered and congruently ill-considered 2015 documentary. Licentiously-hyped as one of the most profound musical portraits ever unveiled, Kurt Cobain: Montage of Heck was directed by filmmaker Brett Morgen, who was granted unprecedented access to Cobain’s personal archives and shaped that material into an allegedly insightful study of the artist’s epigrammatic life and shocking death. Since she had already exhausted the potential for monetizing her late husband’s sketchpads, Courtney Love upped the ante for this project by allowing Morgen to use the family’s personal home videos as the film’s major selling point—evidently, neither party gave a shit that two decades earlier Cobain expressed how violated he felt when strangers invaded his private life in a song bluntly entitled “Rape Me”.

I’ll keep my review of the biopic Kurt Cobain: Montage of Heck brief—mostly because I didn’t enjoy it at all and the overriding emotion I was left with after watching it was anger. But it is worth mentioning here, since it was similarly levied with the purported intention of making its viewers “better understand” its subject. Strange, then, that the two most memorable moments in the movie are unabashedly salacious, and both are focused on candid glimpses of Courtney Love’s behind-the-scenes comportment rather than her husband’s. If you’re wondering what Love’s breasts looked like in the early-‘90s, or if you relish the notion of watching her toddle around the couple’s apartment in a state of opiated incoherence in the presence of their baby daughter… then, brothers and sisters, this film is the Casablanca of that specific genre. But anyone seeking a meaningful exploration of what kind of person Cobain was outside the limelight is bound for disappointment since Montage mostly underscores his least appealing traits, the unpleasant facets of his humanity that we as fans have trained ourselves to banish from our thoughts as we continue applauding his inimitable artistic contributions. Aspects which, of course, Courtney Love is central to. Her odious presence throughout the documentary, and indeed in Cobain’s orbit, serves as a manifest reminder that a man we lionize for writing some of the most exquisite songs of all time was also deeply in love with a vulgar, revolting succubus. And perhaps this is a key reason why revisiting him via panegyrics like Montage of Heck and Journals always leaves a sour aftertaste—as long as Courtney Love has stewardship over his legacy, the worst thing Kurt Cobain ever did will be always be a principal figure in each new celebration of the best things he did.

In addition to her boobie videos, Love also turned over a box of cassette tapes to Brett Morgen (if memory serves, this batch of recordings was dutifully referred to as a “treasure trove” in every press release about the project I read). Morgen cherry-picked a few bits of music from this lot for usage in his movie, which were naturally cobbled into a soundtrack that was touted to fans as a cache of “previously-unheard music by Kurt Cobain.” Since the filmmaker was ostensibly the one who decided what portions of the tapes to appropriate, he is recognized in Montage of Heck’s liner notes as its “Executive Producer”—a dubious acknowledgement that gives Brett Morgen the distinction of being the only person in the history of audio engineering credited with producing an album whose recording he wasn’t actually present for, by an artist he never even met.

Morgen’s pastiche job doesn’t merely form the basis of Montage of Heck: The Home Recordings, it is the disc’s entirety. Stripped of any historical provenance generous listeners may feel obligated to apply, what the proffered material basically amounts to is a half-hour of Kurt Cobain getting stoned in his living room and fucking around on a series of out-of-tune guitars. I wasn’t present for Morgen’s listening party, so I can only speculate on how much music was available for him to sift through, or what the stuff he rejected as inadequate sounded like. But this much is clear: the pieces he chose to disseminate on Montage of Heck range from drearily frivolous to blatantly insulting. The disc offers no real insights (unless you didn’t already know Kurt Cobain got high or played guitar, I suppose), and fans searching the conclave for Nirvana songs that might-have-been will merely discover that Cobain was sensible enough not to pursue an inane number called “Burn My Britches” any further than the two-minute segment he toyed with on his couch here.

Perhaps fittingly, the disc opens with the unmistakable bubbling of a bong, which effectively sets the tone for what follows: Cobain yodeling to warm his pipes up before launching into a rudimentary power chord sequence and yodeling over that for a little while for no apparent purpose (at least Morgen gave the cut a suitable title—it’s called “The Yodel Song”). Elsewhere, attempts are made to tie this cycle of doodles into the songwriter’s established canon, such as the inclusion of the promisingly-dubbed “Scoff (Early Demo)”. Yet, while the prospect of hearing a preliminary version of the 7th-best number on Bleach may seem like cause for celebration, the actual track lands like a slap to the face once you hear that this extract which Morgen judged as precious enough for commercial immortality merely consists of Cobain scat-growling gibberish lyrics over the tune’s main riff until the tape unceremoniously cuts off 38-seconds later; identifying this nothing-morsel as a rough draft of the song “Scoff” is akin to calling a piece of paper with the word “It” typed on it a rough draft of A Tale of Two Cities. Such is the caliber of material spotlighted on Montage of Heck: The Home Recordings, a “treasure trove” that would have been better left buried.

One of the few genuine items of interest among the detritus is “Reverb Experiment”, which consists of three minutes of droning throwaway instrumental noodling, but still sounds kind of cool since a lot of it sounds like the refrain of Slayer’s “Dead Skin Mask”. There’s also a fairly well-formed idea called “Desire” that might have been turned into something striking if its author had chosen to develop it, and the closing number “She Only Lies” is noteworthy since it features Cobain working out an idea on bass guitar instead. Regardless, nothing on Montage of Heck justifies the ballyhoo that accompanied its release, and even the marginally decent pieces are unworthy of mention on their composer’s resume—although, Brett Morgen certainly got a great resume item out of the deal; now he can call himself a “filmmaker / record producer.”

However, this was Kurt Cobain who documented these scraps on the battery-operated boombox in his apartment. And he’s an icon, remember? So—said Brett Morgen and Courtney Love and everyone at Universal Music who had their dollar-bill-mounted fishhooks in the water of this endeavor—Montage of Heck: The Home Recordings shouldn’t be treated like some gratuitous cash-grab collation of idle time-killers which Cobain thought so little of he didn’t bother revisiting most of them again. No, no, no. This is an Event. Try this: Montage captures a peerlessly illustrious artist as his fans have never heard him before, in his rawest, most intimate form, no studio, no audience, just a man and his guitar seizing inspiration out of the ether and channeling it into his instrument as he explores new incarnations of the sound that made Nirvana the band that launched a revolution. Well, hey, that sounds pretty good; we can really shift some units with an idea like that. The only problem is, if we’re going to treat this thing like a legitimate album, it has to have a legitimate hit single we can sell it with. And how do you dig a unicorn out of a pile of lo-fi cassette tapes that live in a shoebox?

Luckily, Brett Morgen found just the solution for this quandary inside that shoebox.

“And I Love Her” was issued with all the buzz of an actual lost Nirvana song—it was even pressed on 7” vinyl like a proper single. It didn’t really matter that the sound quality was wispy, nor that the performance wasn’t particularly polished. This was a recording of Kurt Cobain playing a fucking Beatles tune, dude, and not only was it previously-unavailable, no one even knew it fucking existed. And the internet went apeshit. The cosmic synchronicity of this find couldn’t have been scripted any better: the architect of the band who electrified the zeitgeist in the 1990’s covering the band who electrified the zeitgeist 30 years earlier, arguably the only other rock group in history whose rapid ascension to immortality Nirvana’s was comparable to. The concept alone was glorious, and it wasn’t merely some music nerd’s wetdream—this Moment in musical mythology Actually Happened.

Here’s the thing, though: Kurt Cobain’s rendition of “And I Love Her” only has significance because people desperately wanted it to, NEEDED it to. It was still just a lark the dude recorded in his living room one lazy night, and it still sounds just as slapdash as every other fragmentary living room lark featured on Montage of Heck: The Home Recordings. There isn’t anything especially revelatory about Cobain esteeming The Beatles so highly that he learned to play one of their songs—both his backstory and his discography are liberally sprinkled with evidence he appreciated the Fab Four’s work, and in case you missed the homages there, nearly every piece of literature ever written about Kurt Cobain has helpfully cited the “Beatle-esque hooks” in songs like “About A Girl” and “In Bloom” to underline his unambiguous approbation. Even casual Nirvana fans were surely already well aware that Cobain enjoyed playing songs by musicians he admired—the dozen-or-so covers in the band’s repertoire and the fact that nearly half the tunes which comprised their legendary MTV Unplugged performance weren’t written by Nirvana provided some telling clues on that front.

The level of hype which heralded the arrival of “And I Love Her” (and Montage of Heck as a whole) intimated that a vital missing piece of the Kurt Cobain puzzle had finally been unearthed. Yet the disc supplies nothing more than a disenchanting anticlimax once you actually listen to it and ascertain that the venerated songwriter’s busy-work wasn’t all that impressive. Perhaps this is more a result of a faulty selection process—I’m willing to imagine there is some truly fantastic material on those tapes which Brett Morgen overlooked for whatever reason—but whether or not Cobain’s archives are ripe with undiscovered gems, the resounding impact of The Home Recordings is much the same as that of Journals: nearly everything in that time capsule would be appraised as inconsequential nonsense if it wasn’t Kurt Cobain’s nonsense. Which takes us right back to the pitfalls of deifying any musician to such a degree that every note they ever played is assigned an implied indispensability, even the botched ones that actually make them sound like a less gifted musician than they were.

Besides, we Nirvana fans already got our missing piece. That happened in 2002, with the release of the band’s self-titled greatest hits package. The one I bought despite owning every record which sourced that compilation, solely because there were three minutes and thirty-eight seconds of music on there I had never heard—the one and only known completed and previously-unreleased Nirvana song: “You Know You’re Right”. (Although, Courtney Love had the audacity to debut that tune way back in 1995 when she performed it as part of Hole’s MTV Unplugged set—seriously, sometimes I wonder if every single thing she’s done in the past 25 years has been predicated on a willful and concerted effort to make everyone who loves Nirvana hate her; although, her campaign of terror has made it nearly impossible to even mention Nirvana without also mentioning her, so maybe she’s a fucking genius).

In stark contrast with the nebulous scribbles on Montage of Heck or the interesting but inessential rehearsal tracks which dominated With the Lights Out, “You Know You’re Right” is indeed a revelation of almost religious proportions, a roaring burst of dynamism that is as powerful as anything else in Nirvana’s catalog—the lone tantalizing taste of a fourth record the band would never get to make, a frozen moment of fragile optimism captured just before the world as we knew it ended. “You Know You’re Right” is fucking AWESOME, and its explosive potency is all the more impressive considering that the lone recording of it which exists was essentially the group’s first stab at it. It is one of my absolute favorite songs in a catalog bursting with favorites. And I cried the first time I heard it. And I cried the second time I heard it. And the third… And, 17 years onward, I cried when I listened to it moments ago.

Plenty of Cobain’s tunes have this effect on me. Still, “You Know You’re Right” is a singular case. And I know exactly why that song, above all others, devastates me the most. It’s not because the lyrics are especially poignant, even though they are. It’s not because the track’s intoxicating promise reminds me of precisely how much all of us lost on April 5, 1994, even though it does. The reason “You Know You’re Right” tears my fucking guts out every time I hear it… is because that was it. That was the final song Nirvana recorded. And after it came out, there would never be any more. “You Know You’re Right” was the moment I had to say goodbye to Kurt Cobain forever.

I did that. And I think it’s time for the rest of the world to let him sleep, too.

Over the years, I have accumulated bootlegs of more than 200 Nirvana concerts. Roughly 150 of those shows are phenomenal, and plenty of them are of strong enough audio quality to warrant an official disclosure. That is the true “treasure trove,” a nearly limitless stockpile of unreleased Kurt Cobain recordings that could fuel a supplementary Nirvana release every single year for the rest of human history. And we already know he wanted an audience to hear that music, because he stepped onto the stage and played it for them. Since the continued fracking of his legacy is inevitable, by all means, the Cobain estate should absolutely tap into that wellspring whenever the marketplace is clamoring for fresh product or Courtney Love is clamoring for further cosmetic augmentation. I’ll buy every goddamn disc they put out, and I’ll probably buy them all on vinyl, too. And if you, personally, feel the need to explore the more obscure corners of Cobain’s discography, there are already plenty of places you can look—start with the single for “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, where you’ll find the tremendous B-side “Even In His Youth” and a killer alternate recording of “Aneurysm” that blows the version on Incesticide out of the water.

Hey, I’m a fan first and a snarky asshole second; I get it. I can surely identify with the sustained hysteria enveloping his heritage. Cobain’s suicide was the single most traumatic event of my teen-hood, and all these years later I can still tell you where I was, what I was wearing, and even what I was eating when I first heard the horrifying news of his departure (my family’s comic book store in Anaheim Hills, a Groo the Wanderer t-shirt, and a foot-long tuna on white from Subway). Still, even then, I had a firm pragmatic grasp on my grief. Kurt Cobain wasn’t my mentor, my hero, someone who embodied the man I hoped to eventually be when I reached his epoch of then-unimaginable elder statesmanship (hey, when you’re fifteen, 27 seems like an eternity away—at the time I assumed when I was Cobain’s age I’d probably be doing all sorts of old-people shit like buying a house and raising babies… or at least finally having sex). He wasn’t deity to me, he was simply someone responsible for some of the most imperative music in my life; unfortunately, since music has always been a lot more imperative in my life than deities, his abrupt absence was crushing nonetheless.

But the nature of Cobain’s subsequent beatification seems to suggest that many of his fans choose to remember him as something more, a shooting star that painted a tapestry of light across the heavens before inexorably crashing down to earth, “the grunge-poet voice of a generation” and all that. Hell, to many people, he was. But despite his canonization by the masses, Kurt Cobain was not a messiah and never strived to be. He was flawed and beautiful and complex, and a mystery even to himself—in other words: he was just as fucked-up and human as any of us. Kurt Cobain is not some riddle to be solved; we will never decode him because he didn’t stay the course of his journey long enough to find out who “him” really was or would become. And his awful conclusion will never make sense, because there’s ultimately nothing sensible about putting a shotgun in your mouth and ending a life that meant so much to so many when it had barely just begun.

As we near the 25th anniversary of Cobain’s death, let’s resolve to (finally) allow him his humanity again, and to allow the still-buried pieces of his spirit he chose to keep solely for himself to remain interred with him. Because we’re only paying disservice to the topsoil of his legacy by continuing to dig. And besides, we have Bleach, we have Nevermind, we have In Utero, we have Unplugged, we have a few-dozen additional non-album tracks, and we have “You Know You’re Right”—Kurt Cobain already gave far more of himself to the world than any of us were entitled to ask for.

So if you want to “better understand” him, you won’t achieve that by reading his diary, or seeing his widow’s areolae, or hearing him offhandedly strum some ditty from his childhood to amuse himself. The best avenue available for those of us who never met Cobain to look through his things and figure him out is lighting a candle, putting on a set of headphones, and letting the breathtaking majesty of “All Apologies” surge out of those speakers and into our souls. There is no more intimate way to honor him than that. Nor should there be. Understanding Kurt Cobain isn’t necessary. As long as we understand his music, and we understand what it means to us.

We don’t need his secrets. We have his songs. And for anyone who truly holds the memory of Kurt Cobain in their heart, that’s enough.

March 25, 2019

1 note · View note

haulix · 7 years

Photo

Find Your Lantern: A conversation with 36 Crazyfists

You’ve probably heard it said that the best thing about music is the fact when it hits you feel no pain. While that may be true in certain circumstance, I don’t agree with the idea music exists to numb the sensation of pain. That idea infers that music is a temporary fix, serving as a kind of audio bandage over problem we are not yet able or ready to deal with, and that is rarely the truth. Most music, at least in my experience, is created to help understand and cope with pain. It’s not about avoiding the unavoidable, but rather confronting it head-on with open eyes and zero fear.

36 Crazyfists has spent nearly two decades working their way through the struggles of life with a unique brand of hard rock that has won over listeners from around the world. Their latest release, Lanterns, may be the best evidence of this to date. The record captures vocalist Brock Lindow’s journey from the death of his mother to the place where he finds himself today. Along the way Brock encountered divorce, as well as other setbacks, all of which he found a way to work through on this release.

We spoke with Brock by phone in the weeks leading up to Lanterns’ September 29 release date. In our conversation we discussed the creation of the album, touring new material, and learning to accept the inevitability of setbacks in life. You can read highlights from our conversation below.

HAULIX: So your tour with Devildriver is essentially the start of the promotion cycle for Lanterns, right?

Brock Lindow: Absolutely. We go from this tour, where we are direct support, to a headline run that carries us through the album release on September 29.

Are you the type of band to bring a lot of new material on the road, or has the new album not infiltrated the stage show just yet?

We are actually playing a lot of new stuff on this run. I think we’re playing 4 new songs on this run, in addition to six other tracks. I know that isn’t the traditional rollout for most artists, but it’s what we like to do. When we have new material to share with fans we get out there and share it. Even though people haven’t heard it we still go for it. We have so many damn songs anymore that balancing it all is difficult, but we try our best.

Is this approach to sharing new material new itself, or have you always been one to bring songs people might not know into the live show?

I don’t know about always, but we are not afraid to do it.

We have been talking to a lot of modern legacy acts as of late, yourself included. Lanterns will be your eighth album to date. When you reach your level, where you have long established your presence in music, it seems like your supporters begin looking to you for something different. They aren’t as concerned with a single song as much as the full album. They just want as much new material as you have to offer.

Yeah. I guess we have that same kind of mindset as well anymore. We don’t necessarily set out to write that one song that will change the world or making us millionaires overnight. Those kind of gran illusions have come and gone many, many years ago, if we ever had them at all. The people who have liked our band since day one are a huge part of why this band is still going, so we’re writing music for us and them. As far as hoping radio or televisions picks us up in concerned, we’re certainly not against it, but we also aren’t actively trying to pander to them. We’ve made our career by being true to ourselves and our supporters first. We might not be the biggest band on the planet, but we are guys who you can meet at the bar after the show to have a few drinks. Where we come from, it’s blue collar, and that’s just how people are. There are of course times when you’re in a bad mood and you don’t want to be in the mix of it all, but for the most part the reason we do this is to see and hang out with our community. If there is a beer or hug or handshake out there for us, we want it.

One of the things that has always fascinated me about your band is how you maintain that community while being based in Alaska. The amount of travel you put in really shows your dedication to the fans.

Thanks, man. I don’t want to leave home to hide in the van or the back of the club. I want to get out there and see people.

Speaking of Alaska, do you have a lot of opportunities to perform there? In my previous travel experience it has appeared as though there is not a large number of concerts coming through the area.

We have done some small Alaska runs. We even played Homer, one time, and it was definitely not the most hard rock place in the world. It was a bit more hippie/folk culture, which is honestly a lot of Alaska outside of Anchorage, but they’re all good places. Fairbanks is usually a good show, too. We’re trying to make a tradition out of playing certain places here, and hopefully we’ll make that happen.

I don’t think a lot of people can appreciate the kind of work that goes into concert promotion in Alaska if they haven’t been there. Unlike the lower 48, people have to make billboard, homemade signs, and generally do a lot more work to get the word out, or so it seems.

Yea, for sure. We don’t get too much of that stuff, so I think when we do you have to make it a major event.

When I was reading about the album I learned of the relationships struggles you went through during its creation. As someone who found themselves at the unexpected end of a serious relationship not long ago, I really connected to the feelings captured on this release. Can you talk a bit about tapping into that?

This is one of those things where I am happy you connect to the record, but at the same time it’s unfortunate those things had to happen to us. Everything that I have gone through in the last few years is not unique by any means. It is the same trials and tribulations people face all the time, which in a way made me unsure how deep I wanted to explore those topics on this release. I think there comes a point where you look at your body of work and you wonder if people think everything in your life is miserable because all you do is complain about the same things over and over. I used to feel that way about Staind. I love that band, but after a few records I started to wonder if there was anything good going on in their lives as well.

I actually had a very high brow idea for how to use some metaphors based on native culture to tie into my own journey, but I realized at one point that was going to take a lot more time. I talked to my girlfriend about whether or not I should write about all this and she told me I had to because otherwise I wouldn’t be able to get it out. She was absolutely right. Throughout our career writing has been how I dealt with stuff, so why now - when things are really hard - would I not do the thing that helps me?

I think you pulled it off in a way that does not make it seem like you’re the saddest guy in the world or that your hurting all the time. If anything, coming off the last record I always feel like your albums kind of serve as motivation to keep pushing forward toward better things. This album continues that to some extent, but it also recognizes that even if you feel things are going well that can - often through no fault of your own - get turned upside down when you least expect it.

You have to figure it out. No matter who you are or where you are, shit can turn on you in a moment’s notice. You have to find a way to work through it. Our band, this music, has been a vehicle for me to do that. When you’re around one another as long as we have been there is something about that connection that is special. Something I learned in recent years is how important those connections are, and how without them you’re really on your own. That’s not healthy. You can do it for as long as you want, but it will come out somehow - probably in a way you don’t want it to, like substance abuse. That was not an easy lesson for me to learn, but hopefully it can be for other because of what we’re putting out.

This seems like it ties into well with that Lanterns track “Dark Corners”.

Exactly. I want this material to be something that will encourage me to not retrace my steps. They are little reminders for me. I don’t go back to our old material that often, but when I need to I know they are there. I also haven’t forgotten about the instances that inspired the material, those little bumps in the road that got me to this point.

Being on the other side of the record, do you feel better having gotten these situations and your feelings toward them on tape?

No question about it. Absolutely. Even from the last record, where I wrote songs about losing my mom, was very helpful for me. The weight of this album is different. The last one was stuck in a time vault, but this one is more of a gradual progression out of that period in my life. I look more fondly on these songs just because that period was so bleak. It was hard to lose someone so supportive, especially when it’s your mom. Doing this record, it has definitely been more about the day to day struggle than a specific event or moment in time.

youtube

#36 Crazyfists #Brock Landow #Metal #Interview #Lanterns

1 note · View note

flynnspeaks · 7 years

Text

Flynn Marathons Doctor Who, Part II

Rounding out the rest of Season 1:

Marco Polo: Oof. This one was rough. So this was my first actual reconstruction (I’ve listened to a good majority of the missing Hartnell stories on audio, but never sat through a recon), and let me tell you “Marco Polo” is a terrible story to have to view that way, given how much it depends on its lush imagery to carry essentially seven episodes of meandering. I do wonder how much of this would be enlivened by being able to watch Derren Nesbit as Tegana (much in the same way “The Aztecs” is enlivened by John Ringham’s Tlotoxl) and in fairness there’s a lot of individual moments of charm scattered about the serial--the Doctor bonding with Genghis Khan over rheumatism is delightful, for example. But it’s so very little in such a long story.

The Keys of Marinus: Okay, so objectively I know this is terrible, but I can’t help but absolutely love it anyways. This is really where Doctor Who gets cemented as a completely ridiculous display of fantastic concepts and for that alone it earns my high regard. I always enjoy Nation best when he’s in his “completely balmy” mode of writing (see also: every subsequent Nation script written for Hartnell) rather than his “repeat “The Daleks” the bajillionth time” mode (see: every Nation story written after Hartnell), and I adore so many of the ideas on display here--the brains with eye stalks! The acid sea! The weird gimp suits!

About the only real drawback is this is where Susan gets irrevocably ruined as a companion--though in fairness this has as much to do with Lucarotti writing her as a normal teenage girl in both “Marco Polo” and “The Aztecs”. It’s such a shame, because there’s so much promise with this character, and it only ever gets realized in like...four stories in her entire tenure? Such a disappointment.

The Aztecs: This didn’t hold up for me as much as I thought it would. This used to be one of the high watermarks of the Hartnell era for me, and now I find it kind of sluggish. The whole premise of Barbara trying to reform the Aztecs is, as argued elsewhere, problematic as hell, and the time travel stuff really feels very old hat. It’s also not particularly well-structured--I’ve argued before that the episodic structure of the classic series paces best when each episode is clearly distinct (“Keys of Marinus” is a good example of both sides--it zips by until it spends multiple episodes on the coutroom shit, at which point it halts to a stop), and “The Aztecs” spends a lot of time repeating the same events--the Doctor flirts with Cameca, Barbara spars with Tlotoxl, Ian fights that one dude like three fucking times, etc.

All that being said, there really is a lot of good here, and it’s easy to see why the serial is so well-liked. This marks the first time I think in the entire show where we’ve had a really solid supporting cast--Cameca and Autloc are wonderfully well-rounded characters (I love Autloc leaving at the end for personal discovery), and Ringham as Tlotoxl is delightful--easily one of the best guest actors in a Who serial (though we should put an asterisk on that point given the obvious issues of whitewashing), and he invigorates most every scene he’s in. Is it ham, yes, but such good ham.

And then of course there’s the scenes with Barbara and the Doctor, which are so great--I so wish we could’ve gotten a serial at some point that was only those two travelling together--and the scenes with the Doctor and Cameca are just charming. It’s a good thing the Doctor gets more comedy later on, because Hartnell shines in the cocoa scene. And I love the detail of the Doctor keeping the token from Cameca at the end. So, all in all--not one of my favorites anymore, but still a hell of a lot of good here.

The Sensorites: I love this one. For my money this is one of the underrated gems of the Hartnell era--especially for how foundational it ends up being in giving us sympathetic monsters. Susan is finally used to good end here, though it’s a shame to see her psychic powers go away at the end, and the story is really well-structured--they’re able to pace the episodes nicely by focusing initially on the human crew and then moving to the Sensorites, so we never spend more time than we need to with each set of characters. It falls apart a bit at the end, essentially waiting two episodes for the evil Sensorite to be caught, but then what six-parter so far hasn’t fallen apart in the last two episodes?

Apart from that the only galling things are the fact this was obviously Jaqueline Hill’s vacation story so Barbara’s missing for most of the serial, and then the really bad ending where the Doctor gets mad at Ian for no reason, but I think we can solidly blame that point on the next story. This one’s just solidly a really good example of the show starting to find itself in its first season.

The Reign of Terror: Well, I didn’t hate it as much as I thought I would. Politically it’s of course garbage, making a complete hash of the French Revolution, but other more well-informed people have expounded on this, so I’ll leave it be (except to say it’s so fucking weird to see the Doctor casts on the side of loyalists). Susan and Barbara are treated terribly, mostly ending up damsels or the subject of intense leering from every other male character. The comedy rarely works, and the whole thing is entirely misbegotten. It’s a tossup between this and “Marco Polo” for worst story of Season 1, though the edge probably goes to this one for its politics (which, I stress, really are terrible).

All that being said, though...The episode is surprisingly well-structured and pacy--The show’s beginning to figure out that if it splits the companions up it’s able to expand the amount of plot it can tell, though at times this manifests itself merely as “watch Ian have to find the other three in order for the plot to progress”. I’m actually rather charmed by the Doctor walking through France to have little mini-encounters--it’s a nice way of expanding the world without feeling like too much of a digression. Above all though, what stands out to me is how much this is clearly from the future script editor that would give us “The Time Meddler” and much of the better parts of “Dalek’s Master Plan”--Spooner ends up being a very sharp writer for the show, and there are elements of that in “Reign”, most obviously in the surprise turn of Lemaitre at the end. And even though the comedy doesn’t work here, it ends up paving the way for a more workable take on the historical that will eventually give us Donald Cotten’s contributions, which I personally am incredibly thankful for.

Ultimately, I’m inclined to treat this as the first step for a future important contributor to Doctor Who--much in the same way “Space Pirates” is a first (well, second) step for Robert Holmes, though Spooner is obviously nowhere near his level of importance. It’s pretty terrible, but there are worse first scripts to be had (except for the politics. Again, they are awful here). I do adore that ending scene something fierce, though.

On to Season 2!

#flynn marathons doctor who #doctor who #classic wh #first doctor

4 notes · View notes

thefireescapegarden-blog · 5 years

Text

Happy Spring everyone! I can’t believe it’s finally here!

I’m a bit late to the seed-purchasing extravaganza this season, but just in case you are not finished shopping yet, I’d like to share with you where I buy my seeds and why.

Disclaimer: I receive no profits or products from any of the companies mentioned in this post.

I’ve stuck with sustainable gardening for as long as I had a garden of my own, but I never paid much attention to where my seed came from. After all, as long as I grow it sustainably, that’s all that matters – right? Well, it finally dawned on me that the answer is: no…

You may notice that in this post I use the term “sustainable” instead of “organic”. I’d like to explain why. People tend to think that if the product is labeled “organic” it must be produced sustainable. Unfortunately, that is not necessarily the case. USDA regulations allow organic growers to use a whole selection of “natural” pesticides, which are as destructive to the wildlife as synthetic ones. For example, permethrin is a plant-derived organic pesticide. It is very efficient, yet non-discriminate, and kills bees, amphibians and other precious wildlife along with any pest insects. So as with everything else, conscious consumerism is a must. Now that I’ve said this, let’s get back to the seed production issues.

Of course, even if you use conventionally produced seed, but grow it organically, the resulting product will indeed be clean of pesticides, and you won’t contaminate your garden with synthetic fertilizers in the process. However, those seeds we purchase, they come from plants, too. So if I buy conventional seed, it means it has been grown on a conventional farm, which did harm the environment through the use of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and the like. And thus, I myself contributed to those practices.

On the other hand, when I purchase organic seed, I support the farmer that uses gardening practices I believe in. An added bonus: organic seed suppliers often have better variety than conventional seed suppliers and provide more information on how to best grow those plants. And besides, these days organic seed costs are so close to conventional, you can barely call it an investment anymore!

So, here are my favorite seed suppliers.

Botanical Interests are my go-to source of seed, and I’ve been using their products for 10 years, which is as long as I’ve lived in the US. They offer a variety of heirloom and F1 hybrid seeds, many of which grown organically. I particularly like the diversity of their catalog: for example, back in Russia, Yarrow is only considered a wildflower and I doubt you can actually buy seed. Yet this year I am trying the Colorado Blend Yarrow Seeds, offering several colors, not just the wild white variety!

Over the years I have tried a number of varieties from Botanical Interests, always with great success, and this year I am trying the “Made in the Shade Flower mix” – very exciting, because my balcony garden is mostly shady, but I want flowers there, too!

The family-owned company was established in 1995 and is based in Broomfield, CO. I have reached out to Botanical Interests to ask some questions about their practices, and they put me in touch with April Shelhon, their marketing horticulturalist. I was particularly interested in where the seed comes from, and here is what April told me: “Like most seed companies we do buy from suppliers and direct from growers. We do a lot of research to make sure those suppliers and growers are not affiliated with GMO companies […,] and in July 2018 all of our seed is officially verified by the Non-GMO Project.”

The company’s main goal is “supplying locally-owned garden centers with quality products that gave good, simple instructions to gardeners”, and in my humble opinion, this is exactly what they do. As you can see in the pictures, the seed packets are not only beautifully illustrated, but provide detailed growing instructions. Not all the seed sold by Botanical Interests is certified organic, but it is always stated clearly on the packet.

Renee’s Garden is another wonderful US-based seed supplier. They offer a variety of heirlooms, hybrid and certified organic seed, as well as some roots and tubers. Founded by Renee Shepherd in 1985, it is proud to call itself “a company run by gardeners, for gardeners”. In my mind Renee’s Garden and Botanical Interests are interchangeable. I hope this does not offend either one – they are both exceptional! Both companies have the most amazing seed packets with gorgeous illustrations on the front and detailed growing instructions on the back.

Image source: http://www.reneesgarden.com

When I emailed the company with my questions about where the seed comes from, I got a response from Renee herself, and here is what she had to say: “We buy seed from seed producers both large and small literally all over the world. I try to buy my varieties in the country where they are most popular or where they originated. So, for example, I buy a lot of our basil seed from Italian seed producers…… When we decide to carry a variety , we carefully evaluate it in our trial gardens which are in a mild winter climate here in Northern California, and in a very cold winter climate in Middlebury Vermont. Then, I can write the growing instructions based on our own growing experiences. We choose varieties for flavor and easy culture and flowers for form, color and fragrance.”

Not all the seed sold by Renee’s Garden is certified organic, but the entire company holds sustainable agriculture as an integral part of their mission, and they never cell treated or genetically-engineered seed, adhering to the “Safe Seed Pledge” developed by the Council for Responsible Genetics.

Adaptive Seeds is a company I learned about just this winter, so this is my first year

growing their products. However, I was so impressed by their mission, that I just had to share this with you! Their motto is “Bringing biodiversity back”, and all of their seed is grown in the Pacific Northwest and open-pollinated. Adaptive seeds’ goal is to “steward rare, diverse and resilient seed varieties for ecologically-minded farmers, gardeners and seed savers”, and one of my favorite features is that the source of the seed (the actual farm that produced it) is always stated in the variety description, along with a very detailed description of the plant’s features.

A whooping 99% of seed sold by Adaptive Seeds is certified organic, and they provide a complete list of all their seed growers on the About Us page. The final feature that I liked a lot is that any variety can be purchased in a range of sizes from standard to bulk, which is awesome for things like salad greens that you have to keep re-seeding throughout the season. Seriously, you can get a pound (!) of lettuce seed for just $75 (that would be over $500 in standard size seed packets).

I have first heard about Adaptive Seeds from A Way To Garden podcast, and I strongly recommend you listen to that episode, where Margaret Roach (the podcast’s host) interviews Sarah Kleeger, one of the company’s co-founders. I was so inspired by that interview, that this year I am growing two grain varieties – amaranth and quinoa, which I purchased from Adaptive Seeds. Both are frost-tender plants, so you do have to start indoors, and here are my seedlings at the moment:

High Mowing Organic Seeds is another exciting company selling exclusively organic

seed produced in the US. Tom Stearns is a passionate gardener and seed saver, and he started his first company, the Good Seed, in 1996 with just 28 varieties, many of which grew in his backyard. Today, the company sources its huge variety of seeds form independent organic seed farmers, including Tom’s 40 acre farm in northern Vermont.

I have only learned about High Mowing Organic Seeds this winter, and this will be my first season growing their seed. Unfortunately, thanks to my local postal service, my order arrived only a few days ago (3 weeks late), so I can’t share with you any images of thriving sprouts yet. However, I have read and heard so much about the company from many sources I rely on every day, that I absolutely had to tell you about this company, and I am sure it will be one of my favorites from now on! I encourage you to listen to an interview with Tom Stearns in another episode of Margaret Roach’s A Way To Garden podcast, as well as an interview with Joe Lamp’l on the Joe Gardener podcast, where Joe and Tom discuss why it is essential we support our sustainable seed producers. And if you prefer video to audio podcasts, here’s a link to the episode on Growing A Greener World.

As with other seed suppliers in this post, I approached High Mowing Organic Seeds with a few questions about their practices, and received detailed answers from Maggie Highby, the company’s marketing manager. As I mentioned earlier, the majority of their seed comes from about 60 independent farms across the US. Initially, I was concerned to learn that a fraction of seed comes from other sources, sometimes outside of the country, but here is what Maggie told me about this: “We also work with other seed companies who have their own organic breeding and research programs to purchase organic seed they produce through their network of growers. Some of these seed companies work with farmers who grow seed outside of the U.S. This highly diversified sourcing allows us to offer varieties that are widely adapted to a variety of growing conditions, which in turn allows the farmers and gardeners who purchase our seeds to experience success in their individual locations all across the U.S. and Canada. It also gives us the opportunity to offer more certified organic varieties in our seed catalog than if we were only growing seed in a single location or in a handful of locations; as you know, the offerings available for certified organic seed are significantly less than those for conventional seed. It is our goal to bring more high quality organic seed to growers each year we are in business“.

My other concern with organic labeling is “natural” pesticides, and I was relieved to find out that High Mowing Organic Seeds shares my values: “While broad spectrum pesticides can be an effective organic treatment, some of these organic-approved pesticides can still be harmful to the environment and to human health – furthermore, the development of resistance in pests remains a concern whenever we rely heavily upon a single class of pesticide for control. For these reasons, High Mowing’s own growing practices utilize a wide range of holistic management techniques in order to minimize dependency on any single class of inputs, including pesticides. In turn, we encourage our seed farmers to approach organic seed production with a holistic perspective, prioritizing soil health and nurturing the natural symbiotic relationships that exist on organic farms. We work hard to find seed farmers whose values align with our own, and whose growing practices prove to not only produce the healthiest, most vigorous organic seed, but also do so with a deep respect for the land upon which they are growing and for the communities – both human and wild – that are impacted by their work.” Needless to say, the words “seed production with a holistic perspective” just melted my heart!

Garden bloggers and authors. What can be better than purchasing seed form a

Image source: http://yougrowgirl.com

gardener whose work you read and admire? The correct answer is: nothing. I have been a fan of You Grow Girl project for a while, and last summer I found out that Gaya Trail, the genius behind You Grow Girl, also sells seed straight from her own garden! Gayla loves tomatoes, so these are the seeds she offers most varieties of (I’ve counted 21) – all unique and often rare. What I am most excited about with You Grow Girl seeds are all the uncommon greens she offers, like red orach, epazote, purple shiso and garlic chives, that are often hard to find elsewhere. And of course, every seed pack comes with detailed growing instructions.

These are my little garlic chives seedlings. They are a bit stressed now, because I kept them in my hot kitchen for too long and then took them outside without proper hardening off, but I’m sure in a week or so they will be thriving.

So here they are, my favorite seed suppliers as of Spring 2019. Even though I put these companies in an order, there is no sort of first- to fifth-best rating here, the order for me is more historical, if anything, in terms of when I found about and started using each supplier. And even as I am writing this, I keep learning about more seed companies and projects, like Sow True seed and the Seed Savers Exchange that I can’t wait to try and tell you about.

I hope you find this post helpful, and I’d love to hear about your favorite seed sources as well!

My favorite seed suppliers Happy Spring everyone! I can't believe it's finally here! I'm a bit late to the seed-purchasing extravaganza this season, but just in case you are not finished shopping yet, I'd like to share with you where I buy my seeds and why.

#organic #seeds #sustainability #wildlife

0 notes

trespasserswilliam · 7 years

Note

Would you post a list of all the podcasts you listen to?

Certainly!

Pre-P.S. This post ended up way longer than originally expected cause I felt the need to talk about them. So sorry for the length.

So I have a sort of system for listening. I used to do a lot of different playlists on my podcatcher, but I’ve narrowed it down to two major playlists and a third other playlist.

First playlist is just called New Stuff and it’s all the stuff that I’ve caught up to the present on and keep up with as new episodes come out. That’s all of these:

Welcome to Night Vale

duh

Alice Isn’t Dead

Fantastic. The combination of Joseph Fink’s words combined with Jasika Nicole’s performance is to die for.

My Brother, My Brother, and Me

My first introduction to the McElroys and hot damn

The Adventure Zone

My first real introduction to D&D and also hot damn

The Black Tapes

This is by Pacific Northwest Stories network. It’s a mystery/supernatural thriller/drama, lots of demony stuff.

Lime Town

Straight up sci-fi mystery. This one has been on hiatus for a while, but the story is really good and compelling.

Internet Box

Trash, but trash I’m attached to. Isn’t really going anymore. It was a bunch of Rooster Teeth people but the podcast isn’t associated with Rooster Teeth. I don’t recommend it for people who would be reading this.

Double Feature

The first podcast I ever listened to. Two dudes who watch two movies every week and then talk about it. Big fans of horror movies and I actually started watching horror movies because of them.

The Thrilling Adventure Hour

One of my favorite bits of entertainment over any medium. It used to update weekly because they used to do live shows monthly and split them into 4 parts, but they don’t any more. Similar to old timey radio shows, they had two segments (Sparks Nevada, Marshall on Mars, a western set on Mars and Beyond Belief, a supernatural detectivey sorta thing if the detectives were two socialites that loved each other and loved to drink) that always happened and then a bunch of other segments they would cycle through. Lots of stuff to listen back through, like 6 years worth maybe? and I recommend this to everyone.

Cool Games Inc

Griffin McElroy and Nick Robinson take suggestions and try to brainstorm video games. Hilarious and I love it.

Sawbones

Justin McElroy and his wife, Syndee. Syndee is a doctor, so they do histories of medical stuff, whether procedures, diseases, notable people, but they make it funny. Can get kinda gross if you gross out easy, but very chill.

‘Til Death Do Us Blart

The McElroys team up with the guys from Worst Idea of All Time and watch Paul Blart Mall Cop 2 every American Thanksgiving and then talk about it and the podcast will go on for eternity. When one of them die, they have named successors to take their place. They only started 2 years ago, so there’s only 2 episodes, but I look forward to listening to this for forever.

Interrobang

Travis McElroy and his friend Tybee Diskin talk about stuff they frustrates them. This is one of my favorite podcasts because they talk about things like social media issues and relationships and LGBTQ issues and just a whole bunch of things. It’s very frank and there’s no judgement going on and they’re both around my age by about +/- 2ish years and it’s helped me figure out what being an adult means to me? and what kind of adult I want to be/am?

The Worst Idea of All Time

Two dudes from New Zealand, Tim and Guy, decided one day they were going to watch Grown Ups 2 every week for a year and then talk about it. They slowly descended into madness over the next year and then when it was over they decided to do it with Sex and the City 2 and then they descended into madness again and then they decided to do it a third time with the movie We Are Your Friends and they are 36 weeks into that and then they’re gonna stop and do other things. Very funny but sometimes you do worry about them. Flagship podcast of The Little Empire Network

Off Topic

This is a Rooster Teeth podcast and a loose spiritual successor to Internet Box, only better cause they’re older and wiser and less ignorantly offensive.

Play Dead

I forget how I found this podcast, but it’s about death in video games and the roles it plays and why. Very interesting, but it can get pretty heavy sometimes.

Quality Control

Justin McElroy, as part of his job as an editor at Polygon, talks to the reviewers who review a video game for Polygon and asks them more stuff about the game. Usually I’m really good about listening to every episode of a podcast, but with this one I only really listen to the episodes about video games I have an interest in.

Beef and Dairy Network Podcast

Um. This one’s tough. Set on an alternate earth. Beef is very big there. Or at least beef is very important to the fictional people who do this podcast. Host talks to people about beef. It sounds very not interesting, but it is really very interesting and it’s very funny in a subdued british way. It can get pretty surreal sometimes.

Strange

Rarely updates. I started listening to it because Jeffrey Cranor was on the first episode telling a story from his life about something Strange that happened to him. It’s mostly a storytelling kind of podcast, but since last april there’s only been 3 episodes.

Tim Talks To

Tim from Worst Idea of All Time talks to people he finds interesting.

Trends Like These

Travis McElroy and his friend Brent Black talk about trending news.

Tanis

Another from Pacific Northwest Stories network. Similar to Black Tapes, only no demony stuff, just weird stuff.

Boners of the Heart

Another from the Little Empire Network. Two ladies from New Zealand talk about their actor crushes, to start out with. That framework is only very loosely adhered to, especially the further in you go, but man are they hilarious. Just the two of them talking is a delight and some of the funniest things I’ve ever heard.

Unexplained

This dude has a very calming voice. He just talks about unexplained things, phenomena, happenings, etc. Usually leaning towards myths, ghost stories, that kinda thing.

Within the Wires

From the Night Vale people. I love this one, and it has a very unique story telling format.

The Bright Sessions

A therapist for people with supernatural abilities. Psychic stuff, that kind of thing. It has a lot of LGBTQ representation that is presented in a way that normalizes it and it’s wonderful.

Archive 81

Season 1 was excellent. Supernatural thrilller style, good use of the medium, story within story framing, very good. Season 2 is... not at all like season 1. It’s almost like a completely different story and it’s unecessarily gory and tortureporny sometimes? Listen to season 1 for sure, but the vote’s still out on s2.

The Deep Vault

Done by the same people who did Archive 81. Also very tortureporny. It’s not terrible, but it’s not great either. Can be enjoyable.

Ars Paradoxica

Time travel sci-fi. Very sciencey but in an accessable kind of way usually. It has quietly become one of my favorites.

The Moth

Storytelling. The Moth is a radio show on actual radio I guess? They get regular people on stage and then the person tells a story. Very good.

Dead Pilots Society

Done by the people who did Thrilling Adventure Hour. A lot of those people work in TV, and this is table readings of pilot scripts that never made it to TV screens. Hit or miss for me.

Kakos Industries

Kind of like if Night Vale was evil and sexy? The premise is that you’re listening to the shareholder report for an Evil company that does Evil, but there’s also a lot of sex. Sex positive, and doesn’t usually feel super exploitative.

The Infinite Now

Little mini short stories, all sci-fi themed.

The Orbiting Human Circus (of the Air)

On the Night Vale network. Lots of big name people in this one. It’s enjoyable to listen to, and I love the framework they have for it, but I wasn’t as enamored with it and other parts of the internet seemed to be.

The Males Gayz

On the Little Empire network. Two gay dudes from New Zealand talk about gay stuff. Also very funny.

Always Open

Another Rooster Teeth podcast. This one’s really funny and mostly lady dominated. One of my favorites.

The Alton Brown Cast

Alton Brown has a podcast. He talks to people. It’s as interesting as you think it is.

Darkest Night

I forget how I found this one, too. Probably from one of those podcast recommendation lists? It’s recorded with one of those binarual mics, so headphones is strongly suggested for this one. It’s a horror podcast, and a pretty gory one, too. Very intense at times.

Rose Buddies

Griffin McElroy and his wife, Rachel, watch the Bachelor family of products and then talk about them. I’ve never watched the Bachelor or any of those. This is one of my favorite podcasts.

The Unexplainable Disappearance of Mars Patel

Young Adult podcast! Made for younger kids, like 8-13 range probably? Young kids do the voice acting as well. This is a high production affair. Sci-fi kind of story, and a good story.

Mystery Show

Surprisingly charming. Real life podcast, like Serial, only Starlee Kine, the narrator/creator, is good at solving small mysteries. Only 6 episodes. A season 2 was planned, but then Starlee was apparenly abruptly fired from whatever company was producing this or something? She said she’s working on s2, but it’s a lot harder now.

Small Town Horror

Another horror/mystery podcast. Oddly distressing at times, but intentionally so.

State of the Realm

Final Fantasy XIV podcast. They just talk about the game.

Jerk City

Audio readings of the comics. Sounds like people call in to a voicemail box and read them. It’s very avant garde.

Silent Key

Another podcast by the Jerk City people. I’m... not really sure what this is? It’s like that thing, modern art elicits an emotion out of you but you don’t know what that emotion is or why? That’s why I still listen to this one.

The Dark Tome

A story podcast. The framing device is pretty good, a book that transports you to the story itself, but this feels like one of those shows that used to be on Saturdays at like 11 to trick you into learning about classic literature. Definitely feels like it should be a TV show rather than a podcast.

Surprisingly Nice

Travis McElroy and Hal Lublin (of Thrilling Adventure Hour fame, Steve Carlsburg from Night Vale) talk to people and have a “Surprisingly Nice” chat with them.

Point Mystic

Another supernatural mystery show. Just started not that long ago and they just wrapped up their first story. Really enjoyable.

Hosting

Another Little Empire podcast. Guy from Worst Idea of All Time played host to a friend from Australia for 7 days and they recorded a podcast every day and it just gets more and more absurd.

Polidicks

American politics as told by an american journalist and a New Zealander, namely Tim from Worst Idea of All Time. Just started with this one.

Missing Richard Simmons

I was super interested in this when it started, but I’ve read a few articles decrying it and now I feel weird about it. It has one more episode to go, so I guess I’ll ride it out for one more week.

Rabbits

The last and newest one from Pacific Northwest Stories. Very similar to the other two, except this one is about a cryptic ARG thing.

The second playlist is New Pods, and it’s a newer playlist. In the last monthish I added a bunch of new podcasts, so in order to keep up with the above but also be able to work my way through the newer ones, I made a separate playlist. I put a date cap on it, so this playlist is all podcasts where the first episode is from 2014 on. I was up to Feb 2015, but then I added about 15 new podcasts yesterday? day before? from an ask a friend reblogged and I’m in Sept of 2014 now. 3rd playlist is podcasts that started before 2014. I didn’t want to back up so far that it would take me a year to get caught up, so that playlist is a lower priority.

Podcasts that I am currently working my way through, have listened to at least a couple episodes, all on playlist 2:

Plumbing the Death Star

From the Sans Pants Radio network. Some Australian dudes debate about nerdy stuff in the way nerdy people do, like What Hogwarts House would you be in? or How does Thor get a haircut? Currently In Feb 2014 on this one.

Shut Up a Second

Also from Sans Pants Radio. Kind of like Plumbing the Death Start except not exclusively nerdy stuff. They just talk about anything.

Wolf 359

Just started this one as part of the last round of additions. So far so good.

Pleasure Town

Also just started.

Ones I haven’t listened to yet, but are subscribed to, either on playlist 2 or 3:

D&D Is for Nerds

Dinosaur Park

Boone Shepherd

Movie Maintenance

Super Gym Friends

The Glass Canon

Ghostbusters Resurrection

Dungeons and Doritos

Pokeballs of Steelix

Nerdy Show Book Club

The Orphans

The Call of Cthulhu

Liberty

Mabel

King Falls AM

Alba Salix

The Penumbra Podcast

The Bridge

EOS 10

The Elysium

The Magnus Archives

Greater Boston

Return Home

Our Fair City

And that’s everything in my podcatcher.

#long post #very long post #man that is a long post #stfrancisofasses

7 notes · View notes

maxwellyjordan · 4 years

Text

SCOTUS spotlight: Deanne Maynard on ‘split-second decisions’ as an oral advocate

Deanne Maynard, co-chair of Morrison & Foerster’s Appellate and Supreme Court practice, has argued 14 cases before the Supreme Court since her first oral argument in 2004. On this week’s episode of SCOTUStalk, Amy Howe interviews Maynard on how she prepares to argue before the justice, how she pivots away from hostile questions, and why hypotheticals can be the toughest questions of all. Howe also takes Maynard back to her first oral argument — accompanied by live audio — and what went through her mind when Justice John Paul Stevens asked Maynard a question before she even made it up to the lectern.

Listen on Acast

Full transcript below the jump.

[00:00:00] Oyez! Oyez! Oyez!

Amy Howe: [00:00:03] This is SCOTUStalk, a nonpartisan podcast about the Supreme Court for lawyers and non-lawyers alike, brought to you by SCOTUSblog.

AH: [00:00:13] Welcome to SCOTUStalk. I’m Amy Howe. Thanks for joining us. Today, we are continuing our series on Supreme Court advocacy and we are delighted to have as our guest, Deanne Maynard, who’s a partner at Morrison & Foerster and the co-chair of the firm’s Appellate and Supreme Court practice. Before joining Morrison & Foerster, Deanne was an assistant to the US solicitor general. She’s argued 14 cases before the justices dealing with everything from bankruptcy to Indian law. Deanne, thanks so much for joining us.

Deanne Maynard: [00:00:43] Thank you so much for having me, Amy. It’s my pleasure.

AH: [00:00:46] You’ve argued many times before the justices, but you’ve also argued more than 65 times in the courts of appeals. Do you approach arguing at the Supreme Court differently than when you’re in the courts of appeals?

DM: [00:00:59] Well, many things are the same, of course, but I think there are at least two key differences. The first is, in the Supreme Court, you you always know from the beginning, even before you start briefing, even before you do the cert process, who your panel’s going to be. So, you know, the identity of the decision makers, you know, throughout the entire time. And you can think about that as you frame your arguments, as you draft your briefs, when you’re reading the precedents and you’re looking back at old arguments about what the justices are concerned about and who’s concerned about what and when you’re trying to count to five, which is what you’re trying to do in the Supreme Court. In the courts of appeals, most of them you don’t know. Sometimes you don’t know. Like in the federal circuit, for instance, you don’t know until the very morning of oral argument, you know, basically an hour, maybe two hours notice, which three judges you’re going to have on your panel. And so you just you have to approach it, getting prepared differently. You have to approach the briefing differently. You have to brief for the entire court and that, you know, that is a difference. Secondly, I think in terms of the way you think about your case and the way you prepare for oral argument is different, because in the court of appeals, they’re much more bound by precedent. There’s much often and they’re more concerned about the facts of your case just deciding your case. And so you you it’s much more important to know the key cases that they may feel bound by, the facts of your case and the record and, you know, the fact that they may be willing to decide your case in your favor without issuing a precendential decision, for example. So they’re not always thinking about what rules is going to create, you know, how do we approach this case now?

DM: [00:02:49] Sometimes they are, of course, and sometimes, you know, and I think often you kind of know which kind of case you are. You’re in a case that’s…this is a fact specific case and I didn’t need to win my case. And a lot of times in the courts of appeals, you’re thinking about like what is the narrowest way we can win this case? This is all we need to win this case. In the Supreme Court, of course, you need to know your record, always, and you need to know all of the precedents. But, almost by definition, when the Supreme Court takes a case, there is no governing precedent, because if there was a direct, on point, you know, governing precedent as a general matter, it should be a summary reversal or not a case that they’re hearing on the merits. And so the justices are often thinking about what should the rule be? How will this play out? How do we write a precedent that lower court judges can apply to the next case? And they’re often very unconcerned with who wins your particular case. And, in many decisions, as you know, they don’t actually decide the case, but they issue the new rule of law or they pronounce how they decide the legal questions and remand for the lower courts to apply it to the facts of your case.

AH: [00:03:59] So you have argued your first case in 2004. Has your approach to arguing at the Supreme Court changed over time, either because of what you’ve learned as you have gone along or because the court has changed? I mean, the makeup of the court is different. Or both?

[00:04:19] I’ve definitely gotten better at predicting the kinds of questions that I’m going to get asked. And I feel like as a result, I’m often better prepared for the questions. So, and I do think that helps focus my preparation on the right kinds of questions and the right kinds of concerns and shoring up, you know, our position in important places to be more ready. I also am more comfortable now, you know, having done a number of arguments, I know my first argument, my one of my fears before my first argument was what if I stand at the podium and open my mouth and no sound comes out? You know, if I’m just, like, overwhelmed by the stress and I freeze? And I definitely don’t have that level of worry anymore, so I still do, you know, get nervous and I’m stressed by it.

DM: [00:05:18] And I think that it’s that fear of not knowing the answer or not being adequately prepared that, you know, drives one to get really ready because it’s a lot of work to get really ready. But I no longer worry that no sound will come out.

AH: [00:05:34] So tell us about a little bit more about your first argument. Sound did come out?

DM: [00:05:40] Sound did come out! One of my friends says at first it didn’t sound like me to him. But I have two arguments to share about. One is the about the argument itself. Which, the case involved Ohio’s prison system and the procedures that Ohio uses to place inmates in their highest security prison and whether or not those procedures comported with due process. And I was representing the United States as an amicus to Ohio, and I had not actually written the briefs in this case. The case I was supposed to argue as my first argument – it was one of those rare instances where the Supreme Court denies the United States’s request to participate at the argument. And so the office reshuffled the planning and I argued this case. So I was supporting the lawyer arguing for Ohio. And after, you know, and I had been given advice by, you know, experienced advocates in the office to get to the podium and settle my things on the podium and then take a deep breath when I was ready and look up and say, the traditional Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the court, you know, so to get composed. Well, during the first 20 minutes of the argument, the court and the justices were probing really hard on what Ohio tells its prisoners before they trigger a potential move into the high security prison and weren’t entirely satisfied, I don’t think, with the responses. And I think the advocate for Ohio missed the fact that Justice Stevens asked him a question while he was trying to reserve time for rebuttal.

DM: [00:07:23] And so there was a question pending when he sat down. Which, as you know, you know, as an advocate yourself, is ideally, you would try not to leave a question pending.

[00:07:34] I was basically on my way to the podium.

[begin oral argument audio]

Chief Justice William Rehnquist: [00:07:38] Ms. Maynard, we’ll hear from you.

[end oral argument audio]

DM: [00:07:39] And Justice Stevens, who had asked the question, leans forward and says, “Ms. Maynard…”

[begin oral argument audio]

Justice John Paul Stevens: [00:07:45] Ms. Maynard, before you start, maybe you could answer the question I tried to ask at the end of his argument. Where in the record is the report?

[end oral argument audio]

DM: [00:07:51] And so, I haven’t gotten to the podium yet. I haven’t gotten my things settled. I haven’t taken my deep breath. And this I have this like split second. What do I do? Do I say, “Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the court” or do I answer Justice Stevens? And I couldn’t recall, I mean, you know, this was this must have been like a microsecond in my brain. Right. But I didn’t know what to do etiquette wise.

DM: [00:08:15] But Justice Stevens, he had asked me a question, and so I opted for answer the question.

[begin oral argument audio]

DM: [00:08:22] JA-58 is the form. And if you look at that, you’ll see that it has a line that says…”You are being considered for transfer for the following reasons,” colon, and there’s a blank to be filled in.

[end oral argument audio]

DM: [00:08:37] And so I did know where in the record he could find that document. And I tried to succinctly say, you know, Yes, your Honor, it’s at JA-58, and here’s what it says and “Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court.”

DM: [00:08:50] So when I got back to the office, the office was about split evenly on whether I had made the right choice. And, um, but I think in hindsight, for me, it was the right choice. Because, you know, Justice Stevens, I think, you know, wanted the answer to his question. I knew the answer to his question. I didn’t want to spend the first part of my argument talking about Ohio. I wanted to give my opening. And so by doing that, by answering Justice Stevens’ question, stopping…and and I saw Justice Breyer, I remember him picking up the book and, you know, looking in the joint appendix to find the documents. And so the justices were clearly looking at what I had said.

DM: [00:09:27] But then I was able to reset and then give the opening I had planned for, my, you know, for myself. So that was, so I was I’m happy in hindsight with how I did it. But…

AH: [00:09:37] Yeah, I mean, it was a little bit of Justice Stevens putting you on the spot there.

DM: [00:09:42] Well…

AH: [00:09:42] But I’m not going to ask you to to criticize Justice Stevens, but…no one should criticize Justice Stevens.

DM: [00:09:49] Well, well, I clerked for Justice Stevens, as you may know.

AH: [00:09:52] I know, exactly.

[00:09:52] So, I’ve warm, fond feelings for Justice Stevens.

AH: [00:09:57] I do as well.

DM: [00:09:57] But I have…I’m very happy that I knew the answer to the question.

AH: [00:10:04] There you go. There you go.

DM: [00:10:06] If I hadn’t known the answer to the question, it would have been a very, very poor start to my first argument.

AH: [00:10:14] But I’m certain you would have known the answer.

DM: [00:10:17] So…and the second memory, is more, of a, personal one, which is: I was eight months pregnant when I did my first argument and I had chosen to wear the traditional garb of the solicitor general’s office, the morning suit, to do my arguments before the court. When I was clerking, we used to call that, you know, “the credibility suit.”

DM: [00:10:43] The, you know, I know you know…but for those who were listening who don’t know – the morning suit is…like the kind of suit that traditionally a man would get married in in the morning. So it has sort of white and gray and black striped pants and a cutaway gray jacket, almost like a tuxedo. But it’s a long jacket that’s gray.

DM: [00:11:03] And I wore a black vest and uh…so Marshall Talkin, she wears the same, so, you know, I modeled it what I bought after what Marshall Talkin wears.

DM: [00:11:15] And, but I had purchased it before knowing that I was going to be pregnant. And so, by the time of my first argument, the pants that I had purchased no longer fit. And for, men who have rented tuxedos know it was those kind of rental pants where you can open the buckle and make the belt, like, bigger.

DM: [00:11:38] But, um, even the leeway allowed by the rental tuxedo pants I had bought did not…was not sufficient for my eighth month, um.

AH: [00:11:49] You were eight months pregnant.

DM: [00:11:49] Eighth month body. And so, I had to rent pants. And I still remember they were, they were square pants. So they were like 40 by 40, or something. 30 by 30. I don’t remember exactly, but I just thought it was so funny that I was like arguing in square pants.

AH: [00:12:10] That is a great story. So, you alluded to this a little bit, but walk us through your preparation for a Supreme Court oral argument. How many moots do you do? What else do you do in the month or weeks leading up to an oral argument?

DM: [00:12:27] So I think the sort of big picture approach is to start wide and then funnel to narrow, so that by the time of the argument, you know, you’re just really focused on the things that are most likely to happen and most likely to come up.

DM: [00:12:43] But at the beginning of my prep, I like to go back and read everything, making notes as I go. And then as I get closer and closer, you know, hone in to the ten most likely questions and the, you know, ten points I really want to make. And oftentimes those two things tend to merge into one in the same. The ten most important points are also likely to be the ten most important, the answers to the ten most important questions. So, so, so a lot of preparation is personal. You know, it’s like me and my desk and my books and my computer. But then, certainly,you know, as is as tradition of lawyers who have trained in the solicitor general’s office, I like to do real live-on moots, in role, for as long as the advocate, you know, the questioners have questions.

DM: [00:13:39] And so I like to do at least two for a Supreme Court argument. And I like the mooters who are the pretend justices to be people who…like me, know the kinds of questions that the justices are going to ask, you know, have done themselves arguments in the court, have seen arguments, done arguments, been to a lot of arguments. And they know what kinds of questions the justices ask, but — they have not been involved in helping me with the case so far.

DM: [00:14:07] So they are cold. So when they read the briefs, they see, you know, they’ll pick them up just like the justices and the law clerks will pick them up.

AH: [00:14:17] Right.

DM: [00:14:17] Not, having, like me, drunk the Kool-Aid already.

AH: [00:14:20] Right, right.

DM: [00:14:21] You know, [who don’t] already know why we’re right and why we should win, and then have them ask questions. And I don’t usually do it, with, you know, I don’t do it with…I know people do it differently. I don’t do with nine justices. I, you know, I find that if you have people who really know how the court asks questions, you know, you really only need three, three people, four people to grill you and then they that, you know, then they just all ask more questions than they would if they were, you know, really the justices.

And then I stay in role and I tell the people, of course, the people who have helped with the case and who are right there with me as the Kool-Aid drinkers, they you know, they’re there and listening and taking notes. And then I tell them, though, don’t help me. You know, don’t help me while I’m in role. That’s…the point of this is…to step in all the potholes, and learn where they are, and see what lines of questioning and what answers take me down some rabbit hole we’d really rather not be in.

DM: [00:15:23] And, so, don’t save me in the moot because I want to, like, fall on my face in the moot, not in the argument.

DM: [00:15:30] And, you know, sometimes that can be really tough for…clients and people…who’ve litigated the case and want to jump in and help you when it seems like you’re desperately flailing for the answer. But I think it’s really important to let those things play out in the moot and see how they go and then have as soon as…we usually do that, until, I mean, for much longer that time than I’ll have at the argument…an hour or more until the questions kind of peter out, right?

DM: [00:15:58] And, and then, you know, have a discussion section of a session after that. And that’s where everybody can tell me, “well, you really shouldn’t have said this” or “that’s not right” or I can get you that cite from the record. And that would be a better place to go with this question and really talk about…with the experience advocates, you know, “okay, that that you’re probing on this”, you know, “what’s your concern there?” “What do you think is my best response here?” “The three possibilities we’ve thought of…” You know, and chat about it and try to figure it out in advance. And I think, you know, if you do that well, then you, you know, the moot should be much worse than the real argument.

AH: [00:16:38] Yes, yes, indeed.

AH: [00:16:40] Do you have any traditions on the morning of the argument itself, eat at a certain place, listen to a certain song on the radio?

DM: [00:16:48] I know people have those…I don’t really, to be honest. I do… my one tradition which isn’t really, is more practical than anything else, which is…I get up like really early, like at the crack of dawn and get in my car and get all my things and get to the office. So in case something nightmarish happens, I can like, walk to the court if I have to.

AH: [00:17:07] That’s actually a great idea.

DM: [00:17:10] Um…and then once I get to the office, you know, it’s so early, there’s no one there and I do tend to then just sit with my own thoughts and, you know, review my key points and say out loud, my, you know, my introduction and the answers to the questions I think are most likely and just sort of run through a practice that way.

DM: [00:17:28] We do…have sort of more of a night before tradition, which started…when I was in the solicitor general’s office, my mom and dad would come. They came to I think almost every single one of my arguments when I was in the solicitor general’s office, which was really special. And so they would usually arrive the night before and stay with us. And my mom would always bring a chicken pie from this place in North Carolina that, you know, near our house and that I that I liked a lot. And so she would make that. So she would always make that, that was the traditional, like sort of, I mean, she, as she would say, she made it possible. She didn’t make it. You know, she went got it. And then, but she baked it!

DM: [00:18:08] And so then when when I would get home from my last day of prepping, you know, mom would have be in the kitchen, should have dinner all made, and we would sit down and eat it. And so um my mom died about six or seven years ago, but my husband still makes chicken pie often the night before.

AH: [00:18:23] Aw, that’s really nice…and now I’m hungry. That sounds really good. Talk about your opening statement. Do you memorize it? Sort of internalize it? It’s a little different now, you know, now that that advocates have, you know, whatever it is, two minutes, three minutes uninterrupted.

DM: [00:18:46] So I do memorize it. I try I think you’re internalizing it is a good way to put it. I think it’s memorizing and internalizing. But I try to do it in packets. So especially back in the day, as you say, when there wasn’t the preset amount of time, you know, 45 seconds was often the most you could hope to get out, maybe sometimes not even that.

DM: [00:19:08] And so it’s it was very important to front-load the thing that you most wanted to say, then the thing that you second most want to say and then the thing that you third most want to say. And then if, you know, if they let you go on for a little while, then you get it all out. But if they interrupt, you said the thing that you most want to say. So you didn’t want to spend any time spinning your wheels or clearing your throat or anything, because there you may only have 30 seconds before they jump in. And I think even, you know, obviously last term was an experiment of sorts. But even then, you know, sometimes the justices would would, you know, forget the new rule and jump in. My, my coach here, Joe Palmore…had an argument last year where, I believe it was Justice Sotomayor, started to ask him a question and then, and then remembered about the rule and stopped. And so he was able to finish his planned remarks. But I think it’s a word to the wise that maybe packets is still a good idea.

AH: [00:20:07] Yeah, it will be interesting to see how long it takes them to sort of break that habit. It was sort of a constant source of watching entertainment for the press corps who’s who’s going to mess up today.

DM: [00:20:21] But it’s understandable in mooting. I had the same instinct, which is as soon as the advocate would say something that I wanted to challenge, it’s really hard not to jump in, especially when you sort of trained up in this world…of challenging as soon as you hear something that sounds challengeable.

AH: [00:20:39] It’s hard to break, you know, literally, sort of a decade long habit. I mean, it’s going to take time. What do you take up to the lectern with you? Do you take a binder? Do you take a sheet? Do you take nothing at all?

DM: [00:20:53] I take a narrow binder and I always have. It’s what I, you know, first learned to do when I did my very first oral argument. And I still do that. I tend to use hard pieces of paper so that when you turn it, if you need to turn the page for some reason, it doesn’t make a sound in the microphone and it has, you know, I use those card stocks with the tabs on them. And so often I have different tabs. Maybe if a case has several different kinds of arguments.

DM: [00:21:23] Then, that way if I want to look at the notes for a particular argument, then to look down and grab that tab and turn to it without any delay or fuss…but generally it’s more of a crutch than something I actually use. It was the book that I was using as I got prepared and I refined and refined and refined it, and it’s the book that I look at when I get to the office early that morning to refresh, but it’s very rare that I actually use it much at the podium. The one thing that I do tend to use it for…on the left-hand side of the first page, I have all the most important record cites. Or if it’s a case where I think I might want to quote a snippet of a case, I might have that and the cite, so things that probably I’ve committed to memory. But sometimes, in the moment, you know, and also if you’re going to give them a cite, you want to be really sure you’re doing the right thing. But almost as important as the binder and I think more important than the binder for actual use of the argument — and what I use more than the binder — is a tabbed version of the joint appendix and the APP pages from the brief with the statute in it. And, especially in a really complex statutory construction case…where, if you’re making a point and you want them to look at it while you’re making it, it’s really helpful to give them the page.

DM: [00:22:51] And, you know, you don’t have to say to them, “if you’ll just” — well, it may be helpful now that they can’t see you — but just reaching over to the table next to you and picking up, you know, the brief that has the statutory appendix in it and saying, you know, “A8 of our brief, there’s this language and if I can walk you through it?” Oftentimes, if the advocate picks up the joint appendix or picks up a brief and looks at it…the justices will too just because they’re following along. Right? And and then if you have a really complicated — and I have argued a number of cases with really reticulated statutory schemes where my argument’s very complicated and related to how this provision relates to that provision and I think it’s very important to understand the interlocking nature and the whole — it is useful to, you know, really have handy those pages, tabbed, and where you want to point them to while you’re discussing your points about the statute.

AH: [00:23:56] And…I’ve seen this done. And it also seems like they’ll really listen while you’re doing that.

DM: [00:24:04] Well, hopefully. Right?

AH: [00:24:07] As opposed to interrupting, you know, they’ll sort of give you some time to walk through this.

DM: [00:24:12] I think sometimes in the cases with very complicated statutory schemes, they they are also struggling with how to read the statute and they want to hear your explanation of it. And it is effective, I think, to have a visual aid to walk them through it.

AH: [00:24:25] So let’s talk a little bit about, sort of, argument strategy, for lack of a better word. What do you do…the Supreme Court’s known as a hot bench. You’re, you know, up at the lectern and you’ve got somebody who’s really peppering you with questions, but at the same time, you know that his or her vote probably isn’t in play. How do you deal with it with that situation?

DM: [00:24:51] Well, I think it’s important to remember that everyone’s still listening to what you’re saying. And so even if you’re looking at one justice who you think you’re unlikely to…get, but you know that what you’re saying still might persuade others, it doesn’t really matter that you’re answering the questions of someone you think you’re really unlikely to get as long as everyone else is still, you know, listening, which they, of course, are. And so it’s important to keep in mind that, you know, the others may be open and they may have the same concerns or they may want to know…they may already be inclined to vote with you, but they want to know how to write the opinion that response to this justice’s concerns. And so you’re…the one who’s given the most thought, hopefully, to how to answer those, and why it’s not a problem for your case and what the responses are.

DM: [00:25:45] And so I think it is best to try to answer. Now, sometimes if you feel like, well, I’ve …tried the same point several times, and it’s not…then I think you do want to try to pivot away. And one of the things that you practice in running through your points in preparation is, you know, well, I might get this hostile question. This is my crisp answer to that question and I’m going to pivot to this other point that I want to make. I mean, another strategy is to try to invoke another justice’s name: “This is the answer, but if I could, I’d like to go back to what justice so-and-so asked earlier and often if if one does that, they’ll allow you to move away.

AH: [00:26:35] Yeah. And that actually…especially the first part of…your answer sets up a related question, which is, you know, when you’ve got a hot bench and you’re sort of responding to the questions, how do you get out your affirmative case? And so we’re going to play an excerpt from your argument on behalf of the federal government in Watson v. United States. This was a case about whether or not someone who trades drugs for a gun uses the gun for purposes of a statute that would add five years to his sentence. And so, it looked like you did a really nice job shifting to try to make your case. So, I’m going to play an excerpt. Here’s Deanne Maynard, then an assistant to the solicitor general in Watson v. United States.

[begin oral argument audio]

Justice Antonin Scalia: [00:27:26] They refer to crimes in which there’s been a receipt, but there’s also been a conveyance. Why do you focus on the receiver rather than the conveyor?

DM: [00:27:35] Because our reading, Justice Scalia, gives full effect to the provisions that Congress has carefully chosen to place in D3. And the and the petitioner’s reading does not.

JAS: [00:27:43] What are they?

DM: [00:27:44] And if I can…can explain it? In D1, it’s on page 8A our brief, D1 is set forth. In 924-D1, Congress provided two principal ways in which the government can forfeit firearms. The first is, if an offense is completed, the government can forfeit a firearm that is involved in or used in that offense.

JAS: [00:28:08] Involved in? That broadens that enormously, doesn’t it?

DM: [00:28:11] Yes, it does, Your Honor, but that actually strengthens my point.

JAS: [00:28:15] But cuts the other way. Congress knows how to say “involved in” if it wants to reach that broadly. And it didn’t do it under the provision in which Mr…pursuant to which Mr. Watson was indicted.

DM: [00:28:26] Well, yes, Your Honor. But, if you allow me, to continue on…further on in D1, Congress used a narrow subset of crimes, some of which include receipt crimes, where it only used the word “use”. And that’s the logic of this court’s decision in Smith. And it applies equally here. Further down in D1, Congress allowed the government to forfeit crimes intended to be used in certain, very specific listed crimes. And, in other words, to forfeit the firearms before the um…the crime actually is committed. Some of those crimes include receipt crimes include the very receipt crimes listed by this court in Smith. And so given that Congress believed that the firearms intended to be used in purely receipt crimes were ultimately going to be used by the receipt, Congress employed the term here very broadly, including to receive the firearms.

[end oral argument audio]

AH: [00:29:21] So talk a little bit about what you did in this case, and sort of a little bit more about sort of techniques for making your affirmative case rather than playing defense, so to speak.

DM: [00:29:32] In that clip that you played, what I tried to do was say, answer the question, but if you’d let me explain it, you’d let me explain my answer, because it was a complicated statutory scheme again, like I was referencing earlier. And I had points that I wanted to make that related to that piece of the of the statute. But I needed to walk through it to make it clear. And so I think sometimes in responding to hostile questions, you can say, “I want I want to answer that question, but if you’d let me take a step back first?” or “I’m gonna answer, but I’d like to take a running start.” And oftentimes then they will let you explain.

AH: [00:30:12] Right. They just want to know that it’s coming. What kind of questions are the hardest to answer?

DM: [00:30:18] I think hypotheticals are the hardest to answer.

AH: [00:30:21] Justice Breyer’s hypotheticals…

DM: [00:30:25] So, and I…in some cases, you know in advance, they just lend themselves to hypotheticals and you expect that this is a case where it’s going to be all about hypotheticals. And especially in that situation, I ask my mooters in advance, “please think of some hypotheticals to spring on me at the moot.” Often you won’t get the exact same hypothetical one as mooters asks, but the principles that you’ve thought out in your head will still work with any hypothetical. And, in particular, you need to know in advance: “What’s the rule my client needs? “What is, where do I have to, like, stand my ground no matter what?” Because we can’t give in to this or that hypothetical, because we need that. And that changes depending on the case and it changes depending on the client.

DM: [00:31:11] Some clients, this is their only case like this. They just want to win this case. They don’t need a broad rule. They need a really narrow rule. And you all you have to defend is winning this case. Other clients – this isn’t their only case like this. And they have many cases like this, some of which may have different facts, and you can’t give up their future case. And so you have to hold a broader role. And that’s, I think, a really important thing for advocates to work out with their clients during the preparation in advance so that, you know, at the podium with confidence…what you can give up and what you can’t.

AH: [00:31:50] Yes. Yes. So when you’re the petitioner, you get a rebuttal, which is usually somewhere around three to five minutes, mostly, if you’re lucky, uninterrupted time to sort of wrap things up and state your case one last time. I’m going to play a minute or so from your rebuttal in Sandoz v. Amgen involving the interpretation of — here’s one of your complicated statutory schemes – Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act. Here’s Deanne Maynard of Morrison & Foerster, representing Sandoz in Sandoz v. Amgen.

[begin oral argument audio]

DM: [00:32:24] Thank you, Your Honor. There can be no doubt that the judgment that we’ve petitioned on is a federal judgment that the federal circuit issued a federal injunction and dismissed their state law claims. Two: the statute Congress, when it wanted to provide for an injunctive relief of the L procedures, it did so. It provided, for it, in only one instance, violations of the confidentiality provisions in L1H and significantly, that’s also the only provision that Congress called a failure to do something in L1, a violation. Yet Amgen wants you to read the statute and to read those…the rest of the provisions as implicitly entitling them to an injunction that Congress chose not to provide. And instead they want to call the remedies Congress did provide, as the backup. I…that’s a very odd way to read the statute. The rights here are patent rights. The remedies they were given were patent remedies and they’re forceful. They gave them artificial infringement actions in the case where you participated in exchange and in the case where you don’t…

[end oral argument audio]

AH: [00:33:26] So what…what were you trying to do here and what do you generally try to…accomplish in your rebuttal?

DM: [00:33:34] Well, I think it’s…it’s one in the same. Which is, it’s really important to remember, first and foremost, it’s a rebuttal, right? So it needs to relate to what’s happened since you sat down.

DM: [00:33:47] What you’re trying to do is respond to the arguments that the respondent’s counsel has made or the questions respondent’s counsel’s been asked, to hit your most important points. And it has to be really crisp, and it has to be concise and it has to be only the most important things that have happened since you sat down.

AH: [00:34:08] What advice would you give to someone who is arguing before the court for the first time?

DM: [00:34:14] Listen to previous arguments before the court. And if you can, listen to the arguments in cases, you know, in and around what you’re gonna…what you’re arguing about. Because you’ll get a really good sense of the kinds of questions you might get. Also, maybe some ideas about the answers you should give, depending on how close the case is to your case. And you’ll also hear different styles of advocates because there’s more than one way to be a stellar Supreme Court advocate. There’s…the advocates have different styles and you can listen and try to pick and choose. You know, if you’re arguing the Supreme Court, chances are you are an experienced advocate already, elsewhere, and you have your own style already. And you should go with your style. You should be yourself, learn your case, go in, be confident. And I think, right before you start, take a deep breath and don’t forget to enjoy it. It’s an incredible professional experience and a privilege.

AH: [00:35:12] Deanne Maynard, thanks so much for joining us.

DM: [00:35:14] Thank you so much for having me, Amy. I appreciate it.

AH: [00:35:16] That’s another episode of SCOTUStalk. Thanks for joining us. Thanks to Casetext, our sponsor, and to our production team: Katie Barlow, Katie Bart, Kal Golde and James Romoser.

The post SCOTUS spotlight: Deanne Maynard on ‘split-second decisions’ as an oral advocate appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/08/scotus-spotlight-deanne-maynard-on-split-second-decisions-as-an-oral-advocate/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

#law #justice

0 notes

treadawaytraining · 5 years

Text

Are your bad habits your fault?

Subscribe in a reader

Word Count: 1,154 Average Read Time: 6.5 minutes

What if I told you your bad habits aren’t your fault? Imagine for a moment it’s year 2019 BC. Suddenly you find yourself being attacked by a lion. You don’t have time to think and decide whether or not you’re going to fight back. It happens automatically before you even have time to process what’s going on.

How Habits Work

Chances are, you’ve never been attacked by a lion, so let me give you a few examples that are more common. When you pick up a pencil to write, do you have to decide which hand you pick it up with? When is the last time you had to decide which leg to put in your pants first? Do you have to relearn how to drive to work every morning?

These automatic actions are what we would call a habit. Habits are controlled by a portion of the brain called the basal ganglia. It’s the “habit center” of the brain. Decisions take time and effort. When added together, over time, they can be exhausting. The basal ganglia takes any action we repeatedly do and automates it so that we don’t have to think about it anymore.

You had to think about all those things at one time, but the basal ganglia has automated all of those things so you can focus your attention on filing your taxes, completing that big project at work, or surprising your spouse with a birthday party.

Bad Habit Loop

Of course, all of the previous examples are wanted habits. Unfortunately, the basal ganglia isn’t picky about what it forms into habits. Sometimes, it forms habits we don’t want, such as eating when stressed, biting your fingernails when thinking, stopping at your favorite fast food restaurant on the way home from work, or even picking your nose.

In other words, you aren’t deciding to go to the vending machine at work every day at 3pm. That decision was made subconsciously by your basal ganglia without you even realizing what was happening. All you know is it’s 3 o’clock and it’s time to get a snack. These bad habits aren’t a decision so much as they are a compulsion. We may not even realize we’ve participated in the bad habit (again) until after we’ve already done it.

You can certainly try white-knuckling it and to just stop doing the bad habit, but as we all know, that’s rarely gotten us very far. The reason is, when you go against what your basal ganglia is telling you to do, it feels wrong, even if you know it’s right. When you go against your gut instinct, it drains your willpower reserves until they run dry and you eventually give up on changing the habit.

So now what? Is there anything we can do to change this or are we just doomed to repeat this cycle of bad habits for the rest of our lives?

Hijacking the Habit Loop

Pulitzer-prize winning author Charles Duhigg believes that we can overcome this cycle. In his New York Times bestselling book, The Power of Habit, he lays out the concept of “the habit loop”. There are three components to the habit loop, the cue, the routine, and the reward.

The cue is what triggers the habit. This can be anything. It can be a place, a time of day, a feeling, or any other number of things. The routine is the habit itself. Lastly, the reward is what you’re trying to get out of the habit. It’s also what reinforces the habit.

Our first step is to identify each of the three components in the habit loop. The routine is obvious. It’s the habit we’re trying to change. That leaves the cue and the reward. The cue may not be immediately obvious but is (usually) easy to find. Each time you do the habit you’re trying to eliminate, think about what happened leading up to the habit.

Were you stressed? Were you hungry? Were you lonely? Did you just leave school or work? Did you hit a mental road block with something you’re working on? Were you arguing with someone? Is it the same time of day as the other times you’ve given in to this habit?

If possible, remove the cue. If passing your favorite fast food restaurant on the way home from work cues you to eat unhealthily, drive a different way home from work if possible. Typically this isn’t an option. In fact, in most situations, we can’t remove the cue.

This leaves the reward. The reward isn’t so much what you get out of the habit. It’s what you’re trying to get out of it. This is the hardest part to identify, but is the key to successfully changing the habit. Let’s look at fast food on the way home from work again.

Are you eating the fast food to actually satisfy hunger? Are you trying to relieve stress? Are you stopping as a break from driving? Are you trying to relieve boredom from the drive? Are you seeking human interaction?

Once we’ve identified what we’re actually seeking through the habit, it’s time to replace the unwanted habit with another, more appropriate habit. One important thing to note here is we must choose a replacement habit that matches the reward we’re seeking. In other words, if you’re hungry, calling your friend won’t help.

Let’s look at some possible replacement habits for each of the scenarios I listed above:

Eating to satisfy hunger: Bring lower Calorie food with you.

Eating to relieve stress: Listen to a podcast, audio book, or music, pray, meditate, or call a friend (if it’s legal to talk while driving where you live).

Stopping as a break from driving: Stop somewhere other than a restaurant and stretch.

Eating to relieve boredom: Listen to a podcast, audio book, or music, pray, meditate, or call a friend (again, if this is legal where you live).

Seeking human interaction: Call a friend.

Keep in mind, this will take some time and experimentation, so be patient. You may have to try several different replacement habits before you can find one that successfully helps you replace the unwanted habit.

Takeaway

Identify the habit.

Identify what is cuing you to do the habit.

Experiment with replacement habits that will help you successfully replace the unwanted one.

Thank you so much for reading! If you found this information helpful and want to help the Treadaway Training blogcast grow, simply share this post with a friend. If you like what I have to say, sign up below to become a Treadaway Training insider and get notified for each blogcast and video. I will be back here Thursday with another fat loss topic. As always, God bless you AND your family and I'll see you Thursday.

0 notes

canyouhearthechurchbellsringing · 7 years

Text

#48: HOLY HELL I FORGOT BEN HAD A YOUTUBE

03/19/17

Please refer to the title for the opening line. I am a moron. My mind’s been pulled in so many directions I forgot about the YouTube links in entry #24 completely. I don’t even blame Darek for that; it was my own oversight.

Ben has been quite active, shall we say, in my ignorance… what follows is an analysis of every video uploaded to the Ben Fiinix YouTube channel.

First Video: There is a distinct cut during the video in which Ben loses his alcohol and glasses. I suspect Mark may have done something here. Forest imagery is heavily present in all videos and may imply significance to that forest path in Ben’s neighborhood.

Additionally, several numbers are present in the title. Some refer to the filming date (and possibly time?) but there are certainly extra numbers in the string that have no apparent value. If Darek has taught me anything it is that accidents are rare when dealing with the Figments. Those numbers must mean something.

Second video: The numbers in the title recur here. I think the person writing the titles and descriptions is Mark. It makes the most sense. Chameleon and Zanark have a distinct communication style so that rules them out. Mark can control Ben like Darek controls me. Therefore he is most likely responsible for uploading the vlogs.

This entry details some irrelevant things like Ben taking up smoking again. I don’t blame him; he clearly is heavily stressed even over a year ago. He brings up a security app as a method of catching his hacker. It obviously is never brought up again as he can not technically call Mark a typical hacker. There is also an image of Veronika with a hooded figure cut into the entry. Could it be Mark?

Monaco: This is a video of Ben claiming he does not want to bad-mouth me and then proceeding to talk shit. I mean, he isn’t dishonest in a lot of what he says, just subjective. Despite the schism between us I still see the old friend I grew to trust like a brother. I hope one day we can reconcile our differences.

Here is another interesting tidbit about this video. The song that starts playing at the end is called Anna. Did Mark do that for me to see specifically?

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY PHONE YOU COCKBITES: Here we see Ben’s outraged side in its natural habitat. There is a lot going on in this video that deeply troubles me and I wish I had seen it sooner. It was uploaded on Alice’s birthday. It was precluded by a video shown in between cuts that directly involves Alice. Most of the videos contain messages hidden within them for Ben to find, it seems, but I am also seeing things that clearly involve me. I do not know if Mark is the one leaving those clues, like the song in the last video and the message in this one. At this point in time(late March), it seems Chameleon had influence over Mark and used Ben to fuck with my head. I don’t like it. I’m even more uneasy about the future now.

There’s also a reference made here to Mammoth being victimized by ADDICT. I made some notes back in entry #11 about how I suspected based on Facebook evidence that ADDICT may have long ago completely coinhabited Mammoth’s mind. The two really are indistinguishable personality-wise.

Envelope: This video contains footage of a hooded figure, obviously Mark, placing the envelope for Ben to find. This presumably occurred during the strange camera cut before Ben was panicked running down the street. It reinforces the theory that the hooded figure beside Casey/Veronika was Mark in the second video.

There’s a lot going on with the coded messages in this video. As far as the ¾ code, I will save my in-depth thoughts for a later video. I have a pretty strong lead with evidence gathered and want to pursue it more before commenting on my thoughts. I will however say that the party in the pictures occurred when Casey and I were together, but the pictures show her with Ben specifically. This may strengthen the Mark-Veronika relationship hypothesis.

I also do not think the capitalization code was necessarily deciphered correctly. It could be “Ben, remember what was” or it could be “remember what was, Ben.” Semantics, I know, but there is one more possibility. “Remember what Ben was.” Could Mark be a version of Ben akin to a former self? It is a thought-provoking possibility regarding the general relationship between Figments and hosts.

Rememberance[sic]: Casey’s death really seemed to hurt Ben like it hurt the rest of us. I guess this is what made him hate me so much. He blames me for her death, and I can’t fault him for that. I blame myself as well. Actually I blame Darek, but Ben doesn’t believe in him.

Anyway, most of this is a drunken reminiscence and Ben dancing around the fact that he had feelings for Casey. That’s about as honest as I was concerning Ali in the early entries. While it shows the same social politics, that does not give me any clues about the circumstances surrounding us. One key puzzle piece(pun intended) this video introduced is the blue Mega Blok which has been present in past vlogs. According to Ben’s testimony, it is an object he cannot seem to get rid of. I’ll speak about it more in later video summaries.

A final note for this one: it contains footage from the last video that makes no sense. In the Alice video, it shows Ben saying “she’s really gone”. This was in late March. Casey died on May 14th. Rememberance features a clip of Ben saying this same line in the same context about Casey. How could this footage possibly have existed before he filmed it? The implications here make me scared to consider. This could only be possible if time were being manipulated… right? If that isn’t the answer, it’s something scarier. No rational explanation can justify this. Just how powerful are these entities we have been dealing with?

Forest Video: Third in the series of videos containing numbers in their titles, this video is the first to really heavily represent the previously mentioned forest motif found in the videos. As far as I can discern, Ben was taken here by Mark for some unknown reason. Ben seems to be very confused regarding his general situation in the video. He will bring this up himself in a later video which is blatantly related to events in this video. For now I do not have any special comments I feel need to be added.

Music Video: This one was interesting. It was posted in September but I suspect it took place at an earlier date given the next video. I have done my best to recreate the message in this video for you to read.

"Is there anybody out there? My name is Mark Graves. Is there anybody out there? Hello, my name is Mark. I’m your mind sending out an SOS. Tell the mad Chameleon I’m not afraid of [???a voice without a?] face anymore. I found [??? Likely 'a friend’] on the other side [???] kill Chameleon. [???] words unspoken. Soul of the night, I bring you a message. Listen to me. Two worlds are warring. In your mind's eye you'll see reality falling apart again. [???] Starting over again…”

After this everything becomes slowed down including Castle of Glass, the song Ben was originally playing. A lot of the punctuation in this is theoretical as punctuation is largely inflection which is hard to convey using broken up song lyrics. I’m still toying with a comma or two deciding whether or not I’m getting the correct message. For the most part it is refreshingly blatant.

Mark, Ben’s own version of Darek, is sending the message to reach out to Ben. Because of the assistance of someone on the other side(Zanark) plans are being made to kill Chameleon. A tiny piece of audio is too distorted to make out here, so this is largely speculation on my part as go the specific meaning of the phrase “kill Chameleon” and the previous line. The line about reality falling apart likely refers to the recent events shown in Ben’s last video and how he is clearly still being targeted.

There is nothing to infer apart from what the video itself reveals. This message will also be mentioned by Ben later so any detective work is already taken care of for it. It does show off a unique and previously unused method of communication by Mark that I will have to look out for. Perhaps music plays a bigger part in past videos than I suspected. For example, does this mean Mark played the song Anna in the third video? What about the songs in Rememberance?

Vacation Footage: In September, Ben went to visit Mammoth in California for a week. The video record of it was filmed entirely from Mammoth’s phone. It contained several candid moments which implied the entities were making his phone record. Part of the footage was of a short hiking trip at Lake Tahoe and the majority of it is the two getting drunk for Mammoth’s birthday.

The blue Mega Blok showed up around 2:48 in. It is an easy thing to miss but it proves Ben’s point in Rememberance that he can’t seem to be rid of it. If Mark didn’t subtly place it there off-camera, some random kid left it there and this is a huge coincidence. But as I mentioned in the analysis of the first video, I don’t believe in coincidences when it comes to the Figments.

I’ve mentioned before a connection between Ben and Zanark as well as Chameleon and Mammoth. This theory is evidenced as early as entry #11 and was reinforced in the last video. Proof on Mammoth’s end shines through with a clip of him just laughing insanely. In the same clip is the sound of television static, mimicking a moment in entry #43 inside the black cloud. At this point I believe Chameleon has not lost influence over Mark. However, he seems to be more interested in using ADDICT as his pawn as Mark clearly harbors deep resentment for Chameleon, choosing to ally with Zanark instead. There are some undertones in the second half of the video in which you could tell it was not Ben talking to Mammoth but Mark talking to ADDICT. All the while Zanark and Chameleon’s hold over them paints their motivations. For example, Ben mentioned that his fingerprints were the ones on the envelope, obviously trying to work out that this is because he himself put it together. Mammoth goes so far as to suggest someone stole his fingerprints with silly putty. It was a scare tactic that probably made Chameleon smile. Keep the victim thinking the threat is on the outside. Keep them paranoid and vulnerable from within.

There is some extra possible leads to note in here. The last excerpt of Ben singing the song Shepard of Fire by Avenged Sevenfold may contain pertinent lyrics given how music is obviously a chosen communication method by Mark. Several of the earlier lyrics may contain hints as well if that is the case.

Investigating: At twenty two minutes and nineteen seconds long, there is a lot to garner from this video. It contains a lot to support what I’ve already observed. Ben even flat out suggests on his own that the videos were put up for him to see personally.

He has been silent on social media for half a year at this point. He says this is because the hackers delete his posts so he gave up on even trying at a point. As the video goes on it splices in footage from different recordings. One of those recordings is an early theorizing session that leads to the woods again. It is in this video that Ben brings up the inconsistencies with his statements in the earlier video. It is possible that the forest for him acts as the dark cloud did for me, corroding the neural network and breaking the occupant’s sanity. Another clip contains the 4/4 code on Ben’s literal wall. As well, there is the main video which is Ben’s own analysis of the entities, and a few isolated clips with some interesting occurrences.

The filtered video of the forest recurs here. Is Ben wandering the same forest as I did in entry #43, only his own darker perception of it? He encounters a doppelganger of himself at the end which I can only assume is Mark Graves. In the opening clip, Ben reveals that the blue Mega Blok has been replaced by a red one, and at the end we see exactly how the switch occurred. Mark gave him the red block, and every time it appears in the video, Ben becomes noticeably agitated. Mark says in the woods that Zanark’s protection is running thin. This suggests that the blue block was a sort of talisman provided by Zanark. It’s disappearance also seems to mean that Chameleon has power over Mark again, given the corrupted music and the decline in Ben’s mental health. This brings me to a big theory I’ve been crafting this entire investigation.

I think Chameleon can possess the Figments like Figments possess the host. It makes a lot of sense given the evidence presented. The attacks on all of us seem highly coordinated despite Madrik claiming each Figment has an individual will. If we assume Chameleon can use the Figments to act on his behalf while controlling their host, a lot adds up. In the forest portion of the blog audio clearly shows Mark is no fan of Chameleon’s, just like the music message implied. Mark seems to want to help Ben. So why would he cut Ben off from the outside world completely? He didn’t. He is being forced by a presence beyond the Outer Layer which can move between the Figments at will. It may even account for Darek’s habit of helping me one day and hurting me the next. Chameleon and Zanark might exist on an entirely different level than previously assumed. They are so deep in all of our minds they can appear to be an outside presence. It is almost conclusive based on what I have observed.

Between the code in this video, the envelope video, and my twitter account, I am piecing together a key phrase that may lead to important revelations. As stated previously, I’ll save this for my next update. In Ben’s analysis, he finally admits he is just as crazy as the rest of us. The videos always prominently displayed it, but in person Ben is experienced at keeping his inner madness hidden. Seeing him confess the truth is a pretty big deal to someone who knew him in another life.

He also discusses something interesting which links him to Zanark. The name comes from his past. I actually knew of this character from Richee, who created the RPG and referenced Zane occasionally. I just never put two and two together as the character was always referred to as simply Zane. A potential decoding of one of the envelope codes could be relevant here. “Remember what Ben was”. Zanark just might be a past version of Ben when he was younger and more compassionate, before Mark’s obsession with vengeance overtook that part of him. I’m unsure if this is an accurate theory as it is based partly on speculation, but there is a definite connection between the two.

That concludes the video analysis. I have one more thing to bring up relating to Ali that happened while I was looking into the videos. I had been gearing up to question her regarding Kendra and all I had learned. I fully intended to reveal the truth to her about my renewed investigation. The cat’s out of the bag already, though. She caught me watching Ben’s videos.

It was the video containing Alice’s birthday video. I remember it well because it is the reason things went so poorly. I was researching it after giving it a bit of a wide berth for a while. I wasn’t really in the best frame of mind.

“What are you watching?” She asked. The tone if voice implied it wasn’t a question.

“I’m sorry, but,” I stammered, “I can’t hide from this anymore. This isn’t just about me. It’s happening to our friends too. Don’t you care about them?”

“Of course I do!” She said. “This isn’t something I can’t help them with though. Ben never answers my calls anymore. The last time I talked to Jake he seemed really out of it and he wouldn’t respond with more than one or two words. What do you expect to do?”

“Get to the bottom of this illness.” I said simply, my eyes glued to the computer screen, doing their best to ignore her. There was a sinking in my chest as the conversation progressed. “If I can figure out what is causing this, I can help somehow! I’m so close to a lead…”

“Mat, you always say that. You were saying that when we first had this conversation. You’re never going to find answers. Every answer is another question and you know that. So why are you even bothering to play into Darek’s games?”

“Are you seriously asking me that? Thats a little hypocritical if you ask me.” I laughed bitterly. “This coming from the girl who talked to that psycho? Who fell in love with him and let him tell you what you could tell me?”

She pouted at me. “Don’t make it about that.”

“But that IS all it’s about! You and Darek. Are you even really Ali right now?” I searched desperately for the truth, for the arguments I’d crafted from my entries. “Because if you are, you’re being played. We both are! They’re making these things happen against our will!”

“But it is our will.” Ali said calmly. I could sense a demeanor shift. “They’re extensions of us, and they’re defense mechanisms used to help us survive. Their games are harmless to us, Mat. If anything, you should just trust yourself more to be able to handle whatever comes. This obsession is not beneficial to you.”

“But it isn’t harmless! They can clearly be influenced to perform malicious actions! And what about the doorway, and that dark cloud? You read entry #43 too; I know you did!”

“… they were just dreams, Mat. It wasn’t real.”

Something about that, about the way she said it, struck me like a knife in the back. A white hot flame leapt into my eyes and everything got real fuzzy. I’m pretty sure I broke her precious bong at some point in my unawareness. That sobered me up real quick and I realized I was letting Darek get to me. Something about what she said had set him off on a rampage. Ali teared up and ran from the room without another word.

Sullenly, I set about the task of restoring order to Ali’s room. I think she knew about what I was doing. She was one of the ten early followers to my blog. I don’t doubt she saw me update and just decided not to say anything about it until now. I did my best to quote the exact conversation. Looking back I wonder how much Kendra and Darek had to do with this little argument.

So at least I am mostly free to stop sneaking around now. Ali may not want to talk about the investigation but at least she won’t stop me from making my own choices. I’ll update as soon as I have anything new to share.

0 notes

wupassman · 7 years

Text

Reviewing SweetStoryBro’s Review of the Shenmue story

https://twitter.com/sweetstorybro/status/831177322803892225

Some first ofs:

I am writing this directly adressing Sweetstorybro because it feels more natural and less impersonal to address him but that doesn’t mean it’s not intended for anybody else. I am one of the big backers (toy capsule set pledge) so I have a lot to say about this game I fought 14 years for to get that Kickstarter.

I am sorry if this may read a lil bit like a scatterbrained person wrote this. I basically take notes as I listen and since I managed to lose my write up for the first half of the podcast I had to rewrite that from memory too.

I really like the effort and research you put into this, while in places I can add something overall this is very sastisfying for a long time fan and definately a pretty goddamn complete rundown of what the story is about and how its executed. That being said generally if there’s agreement there is not a whole lot more to add so if I don’t outright disagree you can assume I agreed.

Let get to it then:

I think you did a really good job at explaining in which way Shenmue surpasses your average gaming experience, while its clearly a game it kinda goes past playing but experiencing. As you pointed out this game can be a very different experience for each player based on how hard they are looking to find connections and generally explore the world (and progress the story at just the right pace as to not miss a single cutscenes XD It’s not too easy to make a 100% run but if you do, things like Nozomi moving isn't as much out of the blue, yes she basically leaves as abrupt as he does but it's foreshadowed during the convos with her). Yu indeed built a very lifelike world with tons of lil details and NPCs that felt real. I really like how you brought up that book explaining what Yu was trying to do with this world. That was a thing I fan haven't heard of before. Indeed it is a very key aspect to differentiate between japanese and chinese, which of course becomes a much bigger deal in part II even, when Ryo is removed from his stomping grounds but in Hongkong. It's actually p interesting how a game about chinese culture was kinda a main idea from the beginning, as he was inspired to be making Shenmue (then Akira RPG/Project Berkley) many years prior, when he travelled China in order to research martial arts for Virtua Fighter.

As this is a perfect segway I’ll be skipping ahead a little bit here and talk about the fighting system.On of the main genres I always played were fighting games so I personally appreciated the super simplified VF fighting system (try VF3TB from the same time and youll know the difference) and being such a player I wouldnt even have thought of wanting to play this with analog stick. Golden rule of fighting games: dpad = accuracy, analog = wishy washy. That being said I am not at all opposed to change it up for Shenmue III and make it feel more like Sleeping Dogs. After all back in the day it was a different controller not quite as handy for 3D games (the lack of a 2nd stick means a lot). As long as the fighting is tight and responsive it works for me either way, iof there is a change that needs to happen it’s the camera. I am not really holding it against the game cuz it’s really old but the camera screw ups during fights could leave you clueless which way youre facing at times.

I wouldnt worry too much about the thing with the chapters. The games don’t equal chapters. It’s more like arcs/themes (as you later said when talking about the PostMortem). From basically the very start Shenmue was supposed to be split into 5 games and as of yet the plan/hope is that the final game will be Shenmue V. Shenmue I was only 1 chapter but Shenmue II was 3.

At the risk of completly blowing any kind of credibility I might have and just come off as a crazed fanboy: The pacing of Shenmue I had purpose. It very much corresponds with the mental state of Ryo. Feeling of grief and feeling lost. Shenmue I basically is about running into a brickwall and trying a different path until at the end he finally finds a way to get his passage to China. Until then his plans were shattered and ruined a couple of times and it weighs on him. And it should weigh on the player too. It’s part of how you manage to get this deep connection to the character because you as a player are forced to live out the day as is (or just go for the blocking out that your dad was killed and spend all day in the You Arcade). this is further emphasiszed that in Shenmue I theres rarely ever good weather and most of the soundtrack is depressing too. The days getting long is absolutely intentional. I can see how this might not be the most fun kind of gaming for a lot of people, but this is why different games exist. Shenmue’s job is not to appeal to players who can’t enjoy a game where shit doesn’t explode every 5 seconds. It is important to tell people who are interested so they know what theyre in for but its not actually a negative for the game itself because it actually perfectly fullfills what was required for this part of the story.

There is no way to talk about this without explaining how this correlates with the 4 themes Yu brought up and why Shenmue II is such a change of tone. It’s not just the fact that Hongkong is a bustling metropolis. It is very much the fact that due to the unseen part on the ferry and much more so because of all the masters and other freaks he meets in Hongkong that he opens up more. Again the change in tone of Shenmue II is also accompanied by visual and audio cues. THe soundtrack of Shenmue II is overall more upbeat, depressing themes do play in the more run down quarters but overall the game sounds cheerier. Likewise its not just that Hongkong of course is a much more colorful place than the suburban area he grew up in. It’s also basically always sunny in SHenmue II. Granted it makes a lot of sense due to the different seasons the game takes place in but of course with a highly artistic work like this, this is not a coincidence.

Let’s move right into the next part here. Yes Ryo behaves like a jerkass towards a lot of his peers. While there is a chance that the Voice Acting has some to do with it (No dissing Corey Marshall, the man is a hero!) it is still fully intended for him to be as cold and brooding as he is. You can tell by the face animation, which is p goddamn good for a game that old. Every Shenmue player made jokes about how Ryo’s happy face looks the same as his angry face. His moments where he is at least not totally miserable are rare and special. He is consumed with grief in Shenmue I. Shenmue II is about moving forward from that. HENCE DEPARTURE. not just locally but mentally. I really need to compare the interactions he had with the 2 most important females in his personal life.

The first one is obviously Nozomi: These conversations are awkward for more reasons than just them sucking at talking about their feelings (which btw isnt just them being teens but really very much them being japanese in this era too). Keep in mind both are aware of the feelings the other one has so they have a very close relationship. You’d think close enough for him to actually tell Nozomi what hes on and about to do in order to find the killer of his father. He doesn’t He’s very sparse with the information he shares which is entirely rooted in the fact that revenge is highly egoistical (heres a theme that gets such importance placed upon in Shenmue II). That doesn’t even mean hes an egoist, cuz he is not. He is just super preoccupied with his grief and aparently nobody really knows how to help him finding a better way to deal with it (given his age that makes sense too, no complaints there). As I mentioned earlier tho it depends on your play how many scenes with Nozomi you’re going to see (the Shenmue Passport cd is a good reference). Also since it wasn’t actually out of the blue that she would be going to Canada soon it is quite understandable she has a hard time telling him about her feelings too. This is not only a well known story beat but IRL youd think whether you wanna tell someone you love them when you know for a fact you’ll be moving overseas anytime soon. Especially when you consider the circumstance that if Ryo wasn’t on his revenge trip he’d assume his role as patriarch of the Hazuki Dojo.

Now lets fast forward to disc 4 of Shenmue II (THIS GEM!) and inspect the interactions Ryo has with Shenhua. These are amazing. They’re literally the best conversations Ryo has in all of the 2 games. Shenhua’s cheery and innocent, good natured personality makes it exceedingly hard for him to be the brooding jerkass anymore. A lot of that has to do with all the people he met who became his friends/mentors in Hongkong/Kowloon. He grew because of them. But Shenhua’s personality helped a great deal too. All of the sudden there are no distractions. Just the environment and her. What else would he do but chat with her? If you havent played Shenmue II I implore you to just youtube the conversations he has with Shenhua and compare with Nozomi yourself. It’s like night and day and p much the ultimate signifier for his growth throughout the progress of the game. Now this is venturing a into fan theory territory: the fan base is p much split down the middle of what kind of romantic role Nozomi is going to play in Ryo’s future. To me shes the child hood love interest that never became more due to him being preoccupied and her frankly not actually being available either. It would seem sensible to accept this as a chance missed as a part of moving on. I am positive he is going to end up with Shenhua as she resumes transforming him from this brooding dude preoccupied with revenge to a guy who truly internalises the lessons he learnt in Hongkong and adds a big helping of humanity to it.

Not to excuse his behavior towards Ine-san and Fukuhara-san (because you rightly identify them as cold) part of that is also rooted in japanese culture. With Iwao’s death Ryo became the patriarch of the family. Ine-san may scold him but in the end it is not her place to deny him. Likewise Fukuhara-san was Iwao’s student so that kind of transferred to Ryo now. The bigger point here is that he abandons his responsibilities for them. I don’t think it’ll have actual negative impact for him in story, but there is likely going to be a moment of awakening that it is high time he returns home and takes care of the martial arts school.

I am sorry this actually took a 2nd day to finish but I got busy watching Collisions 2017. I only listened to it once but in seghments. Since I am such a huge fan of the game I wanted to be fair and not overanalyze your review and find nitpicks where there arent any.

While the individual play style is entirely up to each player it is my recommendation for everyone playing this, it to give it time. Let it breathe. Just waste your time away doing fun stuff. You’re going to miss out on a lot if you’re playing it in the way youd play most linear games where you just resume with the next goal in the main quest like crossing of a check list. You are not supposed to leave this early. During my fast plays I still never finished before christmas. At best I managed a jan 15 arrival in Hongkong just to see if I manage to arrive on my own birthday lol. But in all seriousness the time limit for this game is so goddamn long because you arent really suppoed to rush through this too fast. Leaving by the middle of January or even by the end of it makes for an overall better experience IMO (lol I just heard the 10 hours thing and I damn near lost it haha. look as I said it’s ok to play it any way you see fit, but seriously 10 hours literally means just the main quest. no goofing off. You’re missing out on stuff and an overall more majestic experience is all I am saying) To me the harbor segment was super fun cuz it was cool figuring out how you get the most out of each day, incl at least some good toy collecting and maybe training (usually didnt need that anymore at this point). By no means I am trying to tell you to like an aspect you didn’t, but to me this very much comes down to how deep you immerse yourself in the world. If you let the time go by slowly (dont run basically😉) such things as working have a deeper impact on how you experience it - then 2h lunch break still feels like 15 minutes. It was literally the opposite for me in that the harbor is when I am p much forced to move the plot forward instead of just goofing off so much. I know people who share this kinda play style feel the same way that the harbor is - to us - where it really picks up.

Before my review of this is over I’d also like to personally recommend the japanese dub over the english dub. Yeah the english dub feels weird at times but this is also intentional. A good comparision to that would be the lines in the Spartacus TV show. Just like that one was speaking latin in english the Shenmue dub was speaking japanese in english if you get my meaning. The VAs talked about this on the SEGANerds podcast during the kickstarter. Of course due to having played it so much it works for me but it’s easy to tell the difference. At the same time I can not praise the english VAs enough for being incredible heroes who promoted the Kickstarter hard, it was amazing. I love all of you guys. Thank you for your passion. Will def play Shenmue III in both japanese and english to honor all of you!

I warned ya it’s prolly a lil bit all over the place. Anyway thanks for the review. give the man a follow: https://twitter.com/sweetstorybro

0 notes