#there were 4 (four) different producers involved at some point of the recording process that weren't the band members | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

shihalyfie · 4 years

Text

Shihanne’s Kizuna FAQ

Since Kizuna is finally becoming gradually more accessible to English-speakers online, I’ve decided to put together a quick FAQ for those who are not sure about watching the movie or are (understandably) apprehensive about anything about it, especially due to recent events in the franchise and occasional fanbase misinformation. This is not meant to convince anyone towards or against watching the movie as much as it’s just meant to clarify some questions for anyone who might be unsure about watching it, such as how relevant it is to tri. or how canon-compliant it is, etc.

This is meant to be as spoiler-free as possible, although due to the nature of the movie’s contents, I will ultimately have to make minor hints or references to minor plot details. I’ve done my best to keep it to a minimum, but the references to what happens in the story increase progressively as we go further into the post, so feel free to stop reading as soon as you like.

Is Kizuna a sequel to tri.? Are they related?

They are not related. Other than Kizuna being set five years after 2005, there is no relation, not on a story or creative level at all -- the themes, writing style, everything is different. Even the staff is different -- of the tri. staff, the only ones carried over are the voice cast, Producer Kinoshita Yousuke (who was only on Parts 5 and 6, at that, and had no involvement in tri.’s story at all), and some music staff members (AiM, Miyazaki Ayumi) that were also on the original series. Everyone else is either from the original series (original series producer Seki Hiromi, writer Yamatoya Akatsuki) or new staff that self-identifies as Digimon fans.

Notably, Producer Seki was pretty unsubtle about finding certain things about tri. to be unsatisfying, to the point that she openly admitted that certain things in Kizuna were made in direct response to it, so that probably lends a lot to why the creative process behind Kizuna was so diametrically opposite.

What do you need to have seen so far to understand the movie? Do you need to have seen tri.?

You do not have to have seen tri.; it’s effectively irrelevant to Kizuna whatsoever in both theme and story.

I generally recommend having seen Adventure, 02, and their four movies (Digimon Adventure, Our War Game!, Hurricane Touchdown, and Diablomon Strikes Back). Even then, if you’re missing some stuff, the story doesn’t rely on their events so much that it’ll confuse you if you haven’t seen it, and in fact it’s mostly its own story; it’s just that the emotional resonance hits best when you’ve seen what’s happened in the prior works, and its core themes have a lot to do with what was established in Adventure, 02, and its worldbuilding.

Surprisingly, despite being Adventure-centric, I’d say it actually has deeper relevance to the events and themes of 02 than it does Adventure, although that’s just my personal impression. (That’s still “deeper“, in the comparative sense; it most certainly has strong ties to both, and part of it being more 02-relevant is also simply due to the logical nature of it being set in this point in timeline, where 02 is a closer temporal reference point and also has an epilogue that this movie is building up to.)

Are the characterizations consistent with Adventure and 02?

Yes! Very much so! There are a few differences, but they’re all things you can chalk up to how someone would naturally get older and more mature, and even if you personally don’t care for certain developments, they’re still logical extensions of what they might be like as per their character arcs. For the record, making sure the characters felt like themselves seems to have been a pretty big priority for the staff:

Before the preliminary meeting for the script, [Producer Seki] told us, “I haven’t finished reading it, so I’ll be there later,” and then she arrived sometime after the meeting had already started, and said things like, “no, Taichi feels wrong here. He wouldn’t say something like this.”

Producer Seki was personally involved in the creation of all twelve kids and their partners, so it’s safe to say she is probably one of the people you can reliably trust most to understand them. (During the production of the original series, she was also well-known for being the one who pushed for portrayal of their personal home lives and family backgrounds.)

The 02 quartet (Daisuke, Ken, Miyako, and Iori) is portrayed in line with their Japanese version characterizations, so if you watched 02 with the American English dub (which at times took some pretty massive liberties with some of them), there may be some differences.

How much of the cast gets to play a major role in it?

I’ll be frank about the fact that this is mainly a Taichi and Yamato movie (to be fair, it’s not like they hid this fact in advertising). That said, a surprising amount of attention is given to the 02 quartet, and there’s a bit of attention on Koushirou, but the protagonists are most certainly Taichi and Yamato. Mind you, this is in terms of story, not, say, making everyone randomly weak in battle for no good reason; Taichi and Yamato are the “protagonists” of this movie (similar to Our War Game!).

Sora also gets a bit of focus in the short side story “To Sora”, and there’s also a planned upcoming one with Jou (public release details are still unclear, but most certainly expected by the Memorial Story project in December). The accompanying drama CD that came with the deluxe version of the Blu-ray is also centered around the 02 main cast.

What’s with the whole thing about a novel?

There were two official novelizations of the movie, the Dash X Bunko version and the Shueisha Mirai Bunko version. I recommend them as reading for anyone who’s watched the movie; the Dash X has some extra scenes that weren’t in the movie and clarifies a few things, while the Shueisha Mirai clarifies some of the core themes and background points that were a little more obscure in the movie itself.

However, since the movie is first and foremost a visual medium, I do not think that either serve as effective replacements for the movie itself, nor, conversely, that the movie itself is particularly incomplete without them, but rather that, since there are a lot of intricate nuances behind the themes of the movie, they may benefit from some extra clarification. The novels by themselves omit a lot of visual details that enhance the presentation of the movie and make its intended themes much clearer, and since this is a movie that relies more on emotional resonance and feelings moreso than it does events on paper, I don’t think the novels alone constitute an accurate reflection of it.

What was that whole thing about the movie not being compliant with Kakudou lore? Is the 02 epilogue still canon?

The issue most likely has to do with the movie’s premise about partners disappearing when you become an adult. Director Kakudou (original director of Adventure and 02) clarified himself that the “lore inconsistency” had to do with underlying lore that wasn’t depicted directly in the TV series, so it’s not something major like the epilogue (which definitely was depicted on-screen).

His relevant posting is to do with the theory of Digimon being manifested as part of the soul, so my personal guess is that he wasn’t quite on board with the slightly different take the movie had on such a detailed and absolute matter. (He did, however, gracefully invite people to enjoy the movie regardless, so take that as you will.)

Another thing that he mentioned in his detailed posting is that he felt that it would be impossible to reconcile the lore for the TV series and the occasionally contradictory lore from movies 2-4 (Our War Game! through DSB), to the point the original plan for the third Adventure series was shelved partially due to that. Without saying too much, Kizuna does (latently, but nevertheless) involve references to the movies in question, so that probably also contributed to the issue.

For the most part, though, the movie itself doesn’t actually violate that much of the underlying lore for Adventure and 02; it’s compliant with even the background details of his concept (the Chosen Children number tallying over 30,000 by the time of 2010 is consistent with the doubling-every-year principle), and, without spoiling too much, there’s multiple indications in the movie of that whole thing about “partners disappearing when you become an adult” actually being more of a deceptive premise than press made it seem.

As for the epilogue...official press and staff have practically whacked you over the head with a statement that the 02 epilogue still holds and that this movie leads up to it. (Need proof? Here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and about half a million other places in press and press releases; warning that these links are spoilery.) The last one has a pretty clear statement, too:

This is not a movie meant to change the world’s timeline, but rather made to be a connecting story that happened within those 25 years, and we consider it to be a story that expands the world of Digimon.

Producer Seki herself was infamously the one who put her foot down when people asked her about epilogue-related questions in V-Jump, so we’re talking about staff with a history of having no intention of going against the epilogue. This is also consistent with the fact the movie itself constantly drops epilogue and latter-half 02 references (the increasing number of Chosen Children, the kids’ career paths being clear lead-ups to the events of the epilogue).

For all it’s worth, it’s important to remember that the concept of the epilogue ever potentially being retconned has always been purely fanbase invention (and especially Western fanbase, at that). At no point has official staff ever made an indication that they had any intent to go against it (even the tri. staff, of all people, made a huge point of claiming they would still be going with it). Kizuna is not a movie that really holds your hand nor caters to what the fanbase wants, so the best way to enjoy and understand it is going in with the understanding that the epilogue applies by default, rather than considering it to have been written with any possibility of it not applying.

In addition, the actual core theme of the movie itself is very dependent on the assumption that the epilogue holds in mind (which really should be the case, considering that the epilogue was literally right there on screen, no matter how controversial it may have been), and having that assumption allows for a much better understanding of said themes.

Are Takeru and Hikari still involved with the 02 kids?

The events of the movie engineer a situation where the other four end up working as a quartet, but not in a sense where they’ve split or become distant from Takeru and Hikari (rather the contrary, in fact). The circumstances alone go a lot towards explaining why they’re working separately at the time (much like Diablomon Strikes Back), and the drama CD included with the special edition of the Blu-ray confirms that the situation in the movie is purely due to its individual circumstances, and in all other scenarios, they’re still regularly in contact and very close with each other. It’s not played in a way that feels contrary to their known relationship, and, without going into too much detail, there are certain depictions within the movie that reflect them as being part of a “younger group set” with the other four.

Beyond that, a large amount of promotional material classifies Takeru and Hikari as being with the 02 group instead of the Adventure one (for instance, this piece of Ani On Station art).

Is there romance or clear romance baiting in the movie?

No. The movie also happens to be extremely fast-paced (it tries to get a lot of major content out of the way in only 95 minutes, and does not let up even once), so it’s executed in a way in which it’s completely understandable that the topic or depiction would not even be brought up front-and-center, and it comes off as pretty natural in that respect. Quite simply, it feels that even if any of the characters are romantically involved or dating, they’re more than capable of putting the issue aside for the 95 minutes of bigger priorities this movie spans.

For those who are interested in this topic in terms of epilogue compliance (i.e. the two canon confirmed married couples Yamato/Sora and Ken/Miyako), the depictions of the respective characters’ relationships are done in a tasteful way such that, even in the lack of clear depictions of romance, there is minor evidence that the epilogue outcome was on the staff’s minds when writing them, and there’s no awkwardness about it. Or, in other words, where they are now seems completely feasible and natural based on what we know about where they were as of 02 and where we know they’ll end up; there isn’t anything in-your-face about it, but some things might stick out to the particularly perceptive person looking out for it.

Is tri. canon to Kizuna?

Hoo boy, that sure is a question. The answer is...yes and no.

There is a veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery brief, borderline blink-and-you’ll-miss-it clear reference to tri.’s central character Mochizuki Meiko and her partner, Meicoomon. (It has no real relevance to the story whatsoever.) There are things you may consider references, like Yamato being into motorbikes or Koushirou being in company business, but that’s if you really squint. Otherwise, there are no other conclusive references to any of the events from the tri. anime series. In addition, Kizuna very much prioritizes compliance with Adventure and 02, and, when faced with a plot, lore, or characterization point where it has to decide between Adventure/02 compliance or tri. compliance, it absolutely prioritizes the former, even if that means posing a direct contradiction to tri. (a good example being its portrayal of Digimon and Digimon partnerships as something that’s been a naturally increasing part of life since 1995, in stark contrast to tri. having Digimon be seen as unidentified mysterious entities all the way in 2005).

I wouldn’t say Kizuna retcons tri., but it seems to handle it in a way similar to what I call “M03 status” (M03 being previously Adventure/02′s most infamously difficult-to-rationalize entity in canon, especially when it has its own sequel in the form of The Door to Summer) -- it doesn’t go out of its way to reject anything as much as it encourages you to not think too hard about it, and prioritizes compliance with the original series when push comes to shove. Since there’s nothing really contradictory about the idea that “a girl named Mochizuki Meiko with a partner Meicoomon exists” (just like how there’s nothing contradictory about the idea that “a boy named Wallace exists and Daisuke and his friends met him in the US once”), I would say that if you do want to think about it too hard, it’s possible for some of the events of tri. to have happened, but not in the exact way they were presented in the actual real-life anime series.

Although it may seem like a cop-out to some, personally, I feel that the contradictions (especially the lore and timeline-related ones) between Adventure/02 and tri. are so huge in number and significant that it would be impossible for a 95-minute movie to maintain its integrity as a creative work while trying to resolve that laundry list of issues, and overall the movie does give off the impression of being “fun and emotional” more than anything, so it does feel like about the most practical decision they could have feasibly made.

Is it a perfect movie?

No!

Like with any work, there are things you might criticize, or that your personal taste might not match up well with. I mentioned earlier that the movie itself actually is closer in thematic line with 02 than it is Adventure, so people hoping for Adventure reference overdose or Digital World specific lore might be a bit disappointed in this respect (it focuses a bit more on the human growth and drama angle than the Digimon lore and coolness angle, although that’s not to say it completely neglects it whatsoever). There are some writing nitpicks I would say were endemic to the original series as well (some very vital thematic elements are a bit too subtle for their own good, to the point the novels and staff interviews feel a bit more necessary than they should be), and if your favorite character didn’t get a lot of spotlight in this movie, that might be a bit disappointing.

But don’t get me wrong: I don’t say any of this to harp on the movie, but mainly because I think it’s unfair to have unrealistic expectations of it. This is a single movie that’s meant to be fun and enjoyable more than anything else, and to make you think about the themes it has to say. I would not think of it as a full series nor something meant to fulfill the role of a full series, but rather a single movie -- much like Our War Game!, which is a fun and enjoyable movie but by no means a comprehensive series-scale entity -- that’s meant to entertain you and give you lots of emotions and make you think about things in the span of 95 minutes.

If anything, it is a movie definitely made with a lot of heart and passion by its staff, who clearly put a lot of love and effort and respect for the original Adventure/02 (yes, both) into it and wanted to say something emotionally moving. For all intents and purposes, both Adventure and 02 were the same way -- not necessarily free of writing problems, but full of a ton of love, passion, and soul -- and so I think it is a movie very true to the original series in this way.

#digimon #digimon adventure last evolution kizuna #shihameta

34 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

Why The Truth About Britney Spears Is So Elusive

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Britney Spears is one of the most-covered and least-known celebrities of the modern era. She is a millennial icon whose songs were the soundtrack of a generation. A choreographed contradiction from her earliest burst onto pop stardom, the singer became a blank canvass for anyone carrying a paint brush. The FX docuseries The New York Times Presents “Framing Britney Spears” is an attempt to find the artist’s place in the gallery. It is also searching for Britney’s whereabouts in general. Spears was placed into a conservatorship when she was 26 years old. That was 13 years ago this month, and she has been petitioning the court to have that changed.

Britney’s conservatorship, overseen by her father Jamie Spears, has been profitable. With a net worth of over $60 million, maybe too profitable to ever get resolved. It could be a form of life imprisonment and wannabe jailers appear to come out of the woodwork regularly in Britney’s career. Spears also currently has a restraining order against Sam Lutfi, one of her former managers.

According to “Framing Britney Spears,” court documents call the singer a “high-functioning conservatee.” Britney’s fans point out their favorite star released four albums, went on three world tours, performed a sold-out five-year residency in Las Vegas, was paid $15 million to be a judge on The X Factor, and put her name on a billion-dollar perfume line. Yet, she has been deemed incapable of taking care of her finances or life, and even when she can drive.The case is being proceeded over by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Brenda Penny.

For a pop queen in exile, Spears hasn’t been invisible. She’s been spotted at Starbucks with her boyfriend, Sam Asghari. She’s posted clips of her dancing, working out, painting, and giving impromptu fashion shows on Instagram during the coronavirus lockdown. Her posts, of course, only fuel the fire of conspiracy theorists, regardless of their apparent mood or meaning. Spears’ song titles like “Work Bitch,” “I’m a Slave 4 U,” and “”Out from Under,” could also be read as messages concerning her career.

Spears commands loyalty, and her fans love her. This is poignantly evident in Chris Crocker’s viral 2007 YouTube plea to “Leave Britney Alone.” The #FreeBritney movement rose up spontaneously after the conservatorship. The fan-produced podcast “Britney’s Gram” has dedicated itself to getting information to the public. Miley Cyrus shouted “Free Britney” during a performance. Paris Hilton and Rose McGowan have shown support. Britney’s mother Lynne Spears has been known to “like” comments with the #FreeBritney hashtag.

Samantha Stark, the director of The New York Times Presents: Framing Britney Spears, freelanced as a choreographer while making the two-step into video journalism. Writing at The New York Times for the past 8 years, she also produced and directed episodes of The Weekly. Stark spoke with Den of Geek about the difficulties of reporting on Spears’ conservatorship, and the future of journalism in a changing media climate.

Den of Geek: What drew you to Britney, of all the cases?

Samantha Stark: We started filming this before a lot of these court filings about the conservatorship started happening. The original concept was to look back at media coverage of her through this 2020-then-lens, post-MeToo and post when things like talking about mental health are more mainstream. There’s not as much stigma. Looking back at the media coverage of her from the early 2000s feels so shocking now. That was the original concept. Then while we were filming, these court filings started pouring in.

Could you have picked two better names for this case than Wallet and Judge Penny?

Right? There are a lot of similar names that run throughout it. You have Jamie Spears and Lynn Spears and Jamie Lynn Spears. You have a lot of Kevins, just like a ton of Kevins running throughout. There are a lot of Sams also in Britney’s story. There are a lot of re-occurring names. But yeah, Andrew Wallet.

What’s the first misconception “Framing Britney Spears” will clarify for the casual Britney Spears fan?

A huge misperception of her, that I had going into the project, is a lot of people think that the creation of her image and the music that she does and the way her shows are and the outfits she wears are other people’s decisions. But what I learned over and over again was how much of a say in her early career, including “Baby One More Time” at the very beginning, she had in her image and the way she was presented. How involved she was creatively in every show she did and every music video she made, particularly at the beginning of her career. I think a lot of people think she’s this puppet that was sexualized as a teenager and didn’t know it. And I think, from talking to the people who worked with her then, that that was her. She had a really big say in that.

From my unscientific survey, asking everyone I came into contact with “what’s the first thing they think of when they think of Britney Spears”: A lot of people say, “Oh, that time she shaved her head,” or “the picture where she shaved her head.” One of the reasons it’s called “Framing Britney Spears” is there seems to be these very few still-image frames in our collective subconscious, that burned into us when we remember her.

We went into it wanting to figure out how we could learn what was behind the frame, outside of the frame. I think a lot of people don’t realize all the different factors that were leading up to that point. A lot of people don’t realize that she was going through a custody battle then and how important her role as a mother was to her, or is to her still. There’s a lot of pulling back the curtain we could do.

Danny Ramos, the photographer we interviewed, was one of the only people doing video during the big paparazzi explosion. We wanted to talk to him and use his video, so you could see what was happening outside of the frame. He describes the time with the umbrella, that’s another big photo that people remember, like the head shaving. What people don’t realize is how upset she was that day because she was trying to see her kids and wasn’t able to. And how much he pushed her buttons before that happened, some deep buttons. So that’s outside of the frame.

Another one is the central mystery of our film. I think a lot of people don’t know that Britney Spears is still in a court-sanctioned conservatorship and that, for most of the 12 years, her father was the one in charge of her personal, medical, and economic decisions. He controls what happens with her money. The central mystery of our piece is something that Joe Coscarelli, one of our reporters, says in the film: “She’s living the life of a busy pop star, and yet we’re told she’s at risk constantly.” How is someone who can live the life of a busy pop star also be so at risk that she can’t make basic decisions for herself like medical-care decisions, where she lives, contracts, what to do with her money?

Britney’s lawyer, Adam Streisand, mentions a health report he wasn’t allowed to see, and was told by the judge it was justified withholding. I’ve seen a lot of reported diagnoses on the internet. Do you have any idea what that report said specifically?

Absolutely not. I think that’s important. Part of the difficulty with reporting on conservatorships, Britney’s and also any conservatorship, is that a lot of it has to do with medical records. Also, they do have court investigators that go out and interview the people involved. They have different kinds of people who submit reports about the person, and they’re protected under HIPAA and also allow the person some privacy.

Britney has signaled recently through her court filings that she doesn’t want her records to be sealed, that she wants people to be able to see them. But that’s particularly with her estate, which is different from the medical records. Who knows if she would want people to see that report also? But her conservators and lawyers in the past have decided it’s against her best interest. That’s something else interesting about conservatorships, is that other people decide what is in the person’s best interest. As Britney is performing in Vegas, other people are deciding for her what’s in her best interest all the time.

Since we don’t know anything about that report, we don’t know if Britney has a mental health diagnosis. She could not, there could be nothing actually in that realm. A lot of people like to speculate what kind of mental illness she might have, but we don’t know if she even has one. I think that’s important to remember.

Britney’s request for an outside independent party taking conservatorship seems like the most rational solution to the situation. Why is this so difficult?

That is the question. It seems as if Britney requests, “I don’t want my father in charge of being a conservator of the estate. I want this trust, Bessemer Trust, instead.” Yet her father is still in charge. That is legal. The judge made that decision. We don’t know why. A lot of questions about the conservatorship system, as a whole, have been brought up during this process. When someone is under a conservatorship, they are under a conservatorship because it’s considered that they cannot act in their own best interest. Conservatorships are mostly given to the elderly with Alzheimer’s, because a lot of people try to take advantage of people with Alzheimer’s and get them to sign over their money or their wills. And this was put in place to protect those people, which is really necessary.

It’s confusing because Britney is not. It’s a very unique situation, they always say, but we don’t know why.Jamie’s argument is that he has been doing a good job on this for the past 12 years. Her estate has grown, and that if he gets taken off and a whole new company takes over, it can harm her. Bessemer Trust does this professionally. They manage people with gigantic estates’ money all the time. So, the merits of that argument are questionable. But the judge decided that way. She’d left the door open. She didn’t decide he’s definitely staying on. She didn’t do an emergency suspension. That’s what they were asking for. They could still file to remove him.

These legal processes take a really long time, and as they’re happening, everybody’s getting paid. Britney’s estate pays the lawyers on both sides. She pays for her own lawyers, and then she pays for the lawyers arguing against her own lawyers, as well as the conservators’. That is oftentimes what happens with the conservatorship system. That’s also a place where people point to as something that could be a systemic issue in conservatorship systems: are these lawyers always acting in her best interest while also getting paid as long as the conservatorship is in place?

Is Britney a hostage, or is this a self-imposed exile?

I have no idea. We don’t know. Another really hard part of reporting this is there’s such a strong circle around Britney, seemingly controlling who she interacts with, because of the conservatorship, that we can’t talk to her. And she has not said anything publicly on her social media. Through her court documents, she said she appreciates the long “informed support” of her fans and that she “doesn’t want this battle hidden away like a family secret.”

Those were quotes from her court documents written by her lawyer, Sam Ingham, who legally is responsible for speaking for her since she’s not legally necessarily supposed to speak for herself. She could. So, that’s a mystery. Why isn’t she saying anything? Is it because there are people around her stopping her, or is it because she doesn’t want to say anything? Maybe Britney doesn’t want to talk to anyone about this. We have no idea. It makes it very frustrating to report on.

Just because you report on something doesn’t mean you agree with it. Do you think Spears speaks in code on her Instagram posts?

I don’t know. I have looked at every post since 2015 and some before that. It’s really fascinating to look at. Something about her Instagram that I love was this period of time where she was posting a lot of herself with her kids. It was just so beautiful to see her as a mom, because I know from talking to people close to her, that’s the number-one thing she’s ever wanted, to be a mom and to be seen as a mom. So those are really moving to me. Whether or not she’s speaking in code with other things, it’s so hard to tell because they’re always so surprising what she puts up there.

It seems she’s been doing it consistently, even in her songs throughout her career.

Yeah. It is interesting to listen to some of her songs now that we’ve seen all this come out in court. Even the song “Overprotected.” Listening to that now, wow. It has such a different meaning knowing that she does not want her father to be “protecting” her. A lot of her music videos and music has this bondage theme. Britney is often seen in chains or in cages. Also, a lot of themes of people taking from her, like “Gimme More.”

I think people haven’t taken that seriously, but when you look at it and you think of these as art and expression, even if she doesn’t have a song-writing credit on the songs a lot. Felicia [Culotta], her assistant and friend, who’s been with her for most of her career, said she would go into the studio and talk to the people who were writing the songs about what was happening in her life. And they would often write songs based off of what she was saying, which I guess is standard in the industry. I didn’t know. But we can draw our own conclusions to why there is such a big theme, yeah, of bondage and of people taking stuff from her.

Britney was a trendsetter musically. She explored dubstep, and she really is the face of the millennials. Do you think the #FreeBritney movement will also become a millennial icon?

Well, one of the things I find so compelling about the #FreeBritney movement is talking to Kim Kaiman, who was the marketing director at Jive Records. She was the person who met Britney when she first came in at 15, and decided how to market her, what her image was going to be. She very much expressed that she wanted it to be based off of who Britney actually was as a person. She describes her as “your friend that you kind of idolize a bit and look up to, but is the same as you, has the same hopes and dreams as you have.” And the 12, 13-year-old preteen age was who they were marketing her towards, I think she really connected with that.

Kim says she captured so well the dichotomy of what a teenage girl is. Teenage girls want to be grown women, but they’re also kids. It’s this wanting to be sexy and in control feeling that she captured that really spoke to these young people. Almost everyone in #FreeBritney who I talked to was in their late 20s or early 30s. So they were that age then. They were those kids that she was being sold to. I feel like the idea that she’s your friend really carried over, because they’re like, “This is my friend that they’re doing this to. I have to go stop it,” from what they said to me.

When they were that age, she was sold as this perfect, all-American girl. Kevin Wu, who’s one of the #FreeBritney organizers, says this in the film. He was saying finding out that she wasn’t perfect, that time where she was super vulnerable to people, and she was having public issues. I hate saying meltdown because I really don’t know what it was. But the vulnerability that she showed there really, really speaks to this group, and also, I would say, that age bracket in general.

I keep quoting people, but Felicia, it’s not in the film, said “Britney was judged and criticized for who she was. Even when she came out as a teenager, she was judged and criticized for being too sexy. A lot of people who are kind of these outsiders or people who were bullied or LGBTQ people, they were judged and criticized for who they were when they were younger, and so there’s this connection. They can relate to each other.” She said, “Britney relates to them as well.”

There’s kind of this counterculture fandom that the #FreeBritney people are like the people who were bullied when they were younger. And it is kind of millennial. We want to be more open talking about mental health. We don’t want bullying. We want diversity. I do think that it really speaks to that.

You worked extensively with the #FreeBritney movement players. In the review, I wrote you treated them like stringers. How do you rate them as journalists?

I would not say that we treated them like stringers because we did all our own reporting ourselves. We have our own journalists. Liz Day, who’s featured in the piece. Everything that they were finding out and bringing up we independently investigated and verified, absolutely. But I will say, I think they became their own investigators for themselves. There weren’t people doing investigations into it when they first started in 2019. And so, they definitely became their own investigators trying to dig up court documents. But we definitely did that ourselves.

But part of the story is that they became these investigators, so we do feature that in the story. It’s fascinating. Some lawyers are involved with #FreeBritney, and they know how to find the publicly available court documents. They would take them and put them online and highlight them. And as soon as a new court document would come out, like if Sam Ingham, Britney’s court-appointed attorney, would file something new, they would know immediately and post it online and dissect it. But we did that ourselves too.

It’s so much easier for us to do it because we have a full infrastructure set up for it. These people were spending so much time. The reason they started doing the investigating is because there wasn’t any media covering it, and they really wanted that. They wanted people to look into this. And so, they started doing it themselves, and it got a lot of attention. Then the media did look into it.

We had an investigation into her conservatorship in 2016, so we were one of the only people to be looking at it in that way. It was by the reporter who’s in the film, Joe Coscarelli. They did this “Is Britney Spears Ready to Stand on Her Own” questioning: is she ready to not be in this conservatorship? A lot of people are interested in it because of what they started digging up.

I see it similar to the hijacking of right-wing hashtags by the K-pop stans or what’s happening right now with the GameStop stock. The community is bringing the attention and journalism is keeping up with it.

The fact also that the age of a lot of these people means they’re so adept at internet culture and social media culture. They are using social media in a sophisticated way to get people to pay attention to them, for sure.

Do you think Britney had any idea how creepy the Star Search Q&A with Ed McMahon was, or was she just blindsided by the stupidity of it?

I think you can look at her face and be the judge of that. She was 10, but she handled it very well. I think it boded for the future of men asking inappropriate things to her. She just kind of like, “It depends. Boys are mean. It depends.” She kind of shook it off quite well as a ten-year-old.

And you see her in our piece later, when there are men asking her inappropriate questions, she sidesteps it in a really good way, in a really way that’s interesting to watch.

The shocking one was her being told about a mother saying that she wanted to shoot her because she was a bad influence.

The wife of a governor, by the way. That’s the kind of thing that you look at and you wonder would it happen now? I think we’ve come some way of not trying to shame people for their sexuality, but who knows?

There’ve always been persistent dark rumors about Britney, along with other celebrities who reach a certain tier. Why do you think people are so eager to demonize them?

Well, I wonder if that is still true today. I feel like it was very true during this height of the tabloid era, like 2004 to 2009. We’re not as eager to enjoy celebrities’ crashing and burning. If they’re going to rise, they have to fall, that kind of narrative. I feel like our culture is not as into that now. I think we’re less mean-spirited. And I don’t know. That’s what I was trying to figure out this entire time making this piece. Like, why? Why Britney? Why are we, as a culture, consuming all of this?

The reason that there was paparazzi around her all the time is because it sold. We consume that. It sold the magazines better than any other light “storylines.” I don’t know why. I mean, just my opinion, maybe the idea of what could be beautiful in society and perfect in society was so narrow that people were resentful of that. The majority of the US Weekly readers were women, so the majority of people buying those photographs were women. Is it because this ideal was so narrow back then that people became jealous and resentful of her? Now, I think the standard of beauty has opened up much wider, but that’s just my guess.

One of the experts says she’s never seen anyone successfully terminate a conservatorship. If Britney does succeed, will that upset the guardianship designation in the future?

Only time will tell. Who knows? I mean, if there are issues within the system that need to come to light, I think it would help them come to light.

Just because we’re Den of Geek and you’re from The New York Times, I have to ask, are you at all related to Tony Stark?

You know, I get that question a lot, and the true answer is we don’t know.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The New York Times Presents “Framing Britney Spears” debuts Feb. 5 on FX and FX on Hulu.

The post Why The Truth About Britney Spears Is So Elusive appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3tA8XTC

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

violethowler · 4 years

Text

A VLD Production Timeline

A common view I often see expressed in the Voltron: Legendary Defender fandom is that the production of the series was rushed. This stems from the fact that the entire series was released on Netflix within two and a half years, with as little as 2 months passing between new seasons dropping on Netflix. In debates among the fandom regarding the legitimacy of the final season being the showrunners’ true endgame, this timetable has been used to argue that the season couldn’t have been edited in such a short period and was therefore the creative team’s plan all along. I would like to address this point, but in order to do that, I first need to correct some common misconceptions about the pace of VLD’s production.

What a lot of people may not realize is that an animated TV episode is produced up to a year or more before the audience ever sees it on their screens. Netflix broke up the seasons the way they did in order to get audiences “more Voltron more often, so we don’t have to wait so long between each drop[1],” but this doesn’t mean that the episodes were being made in an equally short time-span.

While Netflix chose to release Voltron episodes over the course of two years, production began between April and June of 2014[2][3], and by the time Season 1 dropped on June 10, 2016 production had been completed up to at least Season 4[4].

On average, the production of an animated series is typically 1-3 years ahead of the episodes that are broadcast.

For example, work on Star Wars: The Clone Wars in 2005[5], but the first episode of Season 1 did not air on Cartoon Network until 2008.

The DuckTales reboot premiered in 2017 but production started back in 2015[6].

The development of an animated show is generally broken up into three stages

Pre-Production: Scripts are written and finalized. Character and layout designs completed. Storyboards made for each episode to plan out shots.

Production: Episodes are voice acted and then animated once voicing is finished.

Post-Production: Music and sound effects added. Individual scenes stitched together into a complete episode. Color correction done as needed.

Due to the different tasks involved there is a great deal of overlap where different episodes or even seasons are being worked on in different stages of the process at the same time. For example, at the same time that the Legend of Korra was doing post-production for Season 2, production of Season 3 was already underway and Season 4 was entering pre-production at the same time[7]. The production of Star Wars: The Clone Wars followed a similar pattern, with pre-production of what would have been Seasons 7 and 8 being underway while Season 6 was being animated at the time of the show’s initial cancellation. Here’s a chart to help visualize what the process generally looks like:

[A huge thank you to @CrystalRebellion for putting this chart together]

Another thing that some fans may not be aware of is that there is a difference between a broadcast season and a production season. Episodes of an animated show are produced in batches that do not always correspond to how they are presented to the audience. For example, episodes of Star Wars: The Clone Wars were produced in batches of 25-26, but the first four seasons to air on Cartoon Network were only 22 episodes each. In every season there were an average of 3 episodes that had been created as part of a separate batch[8]:

Voltron: Legendary Defender was contracted with Netflix for a total of 78 episodes. Though they were released as 8 seasons (6 13-episode arcs), they were produced in batches of 26. Seasons 1-2 on Netflix are considered Production Season 1. Seasons 3-6 are Production Season 2. And Seasons 7-8 are Production Season 3. This fits with the voice actors for the MFE pilots - who were introduced in Season 7 - mentioning in an interview with Let’s Voltron podcast that the lines they recorded for their characters were supposed to be for the third season[9].

At some point during the production of Seasons 7-8, changes were ordered to the season that resulted in more work for the animators, resulting in the creation of S7E04 The Feud as a filler episode with limited animation to give the animation team a break. As a byproduct of this, some episodes ended up being moved around from the order they were originally intended[10].

So with all of this in mind, the timeline of VLD’s production looks roughly like this:

2014

Writing begins for Production Season 1 (Netflix Seasons 1-2) between April and June

2015

Writing for Production Season 1 (Netflix Seasons 1-2) finished

Animation for Production Season 1 (Netflix Seasons 1-2) begins

Writing for Production Season 2 (Netflix Seasons 3-6) begins

2016

Animation for Production Season 1 (Netflix Seasons 1-2) finished

Writing for Production Season 2 (Netflix Seasons 3-6) finished

13 episodes of Production Season 1 released on Netflix in June as “Season 1”

Animation for Production Season 2 (Netflix Seasons 3-6) begins

Writing for Production Season 3 (Netflix Seasons 7-8) begins

2017

13 episodes of Production Season 1 released on Netflix in January as “Season 2”

Animation for Production Season 2 (Netflix Seasons 3-6) finished

Writing for Production Season 3 (Netflix Seasons 7-8) finished

Animation for Production Season 3 (Netflix Seasons 7-8) begins

7 episodes of Production Season 2 released on Netflix in August as “Season 3”

6 episodes of Production Season 2 released on Netflix in October as “Season 4”

Animation for first half of Production Season 3 (Netflix Season 7) finished

Changes ordered to first half of Production Season 3 (Netflix Season 7)

2018

6 episodes of Production Season 2 released on Netflix in March as “Season 5”

7 episodes of Production Season 2 released on Netflix in June as “Season 6”

Changes to first half of Production Season 3 (Netflix Season 7) finished

Animation for second half of Production Season 3 (Netflix Season 8) finished

Kimberly Brooks and Jeremy Shada called back into the studio in July to record new dialogue

13 episodes of Production Season 3 released on Netflix in August as “Season 7”

The epilogue is created sometime in the fall

Screencaps of the epilogue are leaked on the internet in October

13 episodes of Production Season 3 released on Netflix in December as “Season 8”

In June 2018, many of the show’s writers announced their departure from the production team. Because this occurred shortly after the last 7 episodes of the second production season were released on Netflix as Season 6, many assumed that this meant that the writers had no input on Seasons 7-8 and that this was the reason for the decline in the show’s writing quality. However this is observably false as the same writers who left are still credited in all episodes of the third production season. Most notably, Tim Hedrick is credited with S7E04 The Feud, one of the last episodes of Season 7 to be created.

The changes that resulted in the creation of The Feud would have happened after the scripts for the final production season were already finalized. This means that once those new episodes were complete there was nothing left for the writers to do before the remaining episodes dropped on Netflix. That is when the writers left: after their role in the production process was officially over. Not right in the middle of it like so many assume. Their job was done, so there was no reason to stay.

Critics of the #FreeVLDS8 campaign claim that those involved, particularly Team Purple Lion, are saying that the entire season was reanimated, which is incorrect. If that were the case, the animators at Studio Mir would not have been surprised at the season we got in December 2018.

If you’re looking at this timeline and going “but there still wouldn’t be time for them to edit the season, you would be correct if you are only thinking in terms of new animation being created. Because if the editing of Season 8 was accomplished by new animation, there truly wouldn’t be enough time to make new animation for an entire season. And that’s because they didn’t.

So if there was no new animation, how was the editing done?

Exhibit A:

[Sorry for the glare from the ceiling lights in my bedroom.]

It was done by cropping the split screens. Taking out pieces of episodes. Using stock photos and static images to put characters in shots they weren’t originally there for. Dos Santos even mentioned cutting and pasting mouths from one character to another[11]. He claimed at the time that it was specifically for the epilogue, but that’s impossible because with the exception of Shiro’s kiss there was no movement in the epilogue whatsoever. (I refer you to @dragonofyang’s piece on NDAs[12] for more on how those early 2019 interviews were misleading). The only “new” animation as casual fans think of it would be places where one character is traced over another in a few key shots that had to be left in to meet the required runtime and ensure that the final season met the minimum number of episodes mandated by their contract with Netflix.

It is because there was no time to re-animate the entire season that Season 8 had as many visual and audio mistakes as it did. Post-production of the season would have already been finished by late June/early July of 2018. All the showrunners could do in the time they had was cut, paste, rearrange, and trace over in order to make sure this Frankenstein version of the season had at least the semblance of a coherent plot.

This is why supporters of FreeVLDS8 are so confident that an uncut version of Season 8 exists. Because production was already over when the editing happened, and it was done in such a way that the odds are in our favor that Mir and Dreamworks would have backup files of the original episodes archived on a computer somewhere.

Sources:

[1] Comic-Con 2017: Voltron Legendary Defender Season 3 is Only 7 Episodes But…; July 20, 2017. https://www.ign.com/articles/2017/07/20/comic-con-2017-voltron-legendary-defender-season-3-is-only-7-episodes-but

[2] Creating Voltron: Legendary Defender; June 10, 2016. https://www.denofgeek.com/tv/creating-voltron-legendary-defender/

[3] Tweet by Joaquim Dos Santos; October 12, 2018. https://web.archive.org/web/20200723131054/https://twitter.com/JDS_247/status/1050905860728213506

[4] Voltron Season 4 Episodes 1 & 2 Review w/ Joaquim Dos Santos, Lauren Montgomery, & Jeremy Shada; October 16, 2017.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80SejQPuS9E&feature=youtu.be

[5] “starwars.com at Comic-Con 2005”; July 12, 2005. https://web.archive.org/web/20080323023414/http://www.starwars.com/community/event/con/f20050712/indexp5.html

[6] DuckTales Cast Not Returning For Reboot; May 15, 2015. https://web.archive.org/web/20150526071332/http://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/news/Ducktales-Cast-Not-Returning-for-Reboot/

[7] Tumblr post by Bryna Konietzko; July 13, 2013.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130822050636/http://bryankonietzko.tumblr.com/post/55788253484/to-give-you-a-sense-of-just-how-long-it-takes-to

[8] List of Star Wars: The Clone Wars episodes - wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars:_The_Clone_Wars_episodes

[9] Let’s Voltron, Episode 180: “MFE Pilots Interview with Anna Graves, Zehra Fazal & AJ LoCascio”; May 27, 2019. https://letsvoltron.simplecast.com/episodes/mfe-pilots-interview-with-anna-graves-z

[10] Voltron Legendary Defender Interview - The Garfle Warfle Snick Spectacular; October 24, 2018.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcJmq0sNGN4

[11] “Voltron Full Series Review with Showrunners in Studio”. Afterbuzz TV; March 4, 2019 www.youtube.com/watch?v=om_t8A99WJo

[12] From the Sock Puppet’s Mouth; March 27, 2019. https://www.teampurplelion.com/from-the-sock-puppets-mouth/

#freevlds8 #voltron legendary defender #voltron season 8 #vld season 8 #vlds8 #vld production #production timeline #voltron meta #vld meta

5 notes · View notes

sulkybbarnes · 5 years

Note

could you recomend some podcasts? because i want to get into them but there are so many i dont even know where to begin... i've already listened to the bright sessions tho and i love it!

Hey anon!! Of course, I’m more than happy to give podcast recommendations so I’ve included my faves here which are from wildly different genres, but all have lgbt+ characters and awesome representation!!

Alice Isn’t Dead: This podcast follows a truck driver on her mission to find her missing wife. I’m not a horror person at all, but this podcast is the exception for me. It has some horror elements as the protag faces different supernatural scenarios and creatures on her road trip through America, but each story somehow ends up reflecting the reality we live in and is far deeper than some scary story. It genuinely has some of the best prose and storytelling I’ve ever heard/read, and slowly starts developing an awesome plot along the way. It also has a kickass wlw couple at the heart of it, is narrated by a woc, and handles the protag’s anxiety beautifully. You can’t get better than this tbh!

The Bright Sessions: I adore this podcast and I’m adding it for anyone who hasn’t listened to it yet. TBS is presented as a collection of tapes/recordings made by DR Bright, a therapist who exclusively treats patients with super powers known as atypicals. Each tape is a character with different powers, and the story of each individual slowly starts becoming part of a bigger plot. Excellent lgbt+ representation, great character dynamics, and has one of my favourite lgbt couples in fiction. TBS also deals with mental health issues and trauma super well.

Wolf 359: A story following the crew of a space ship sent into deep space. This one starts up all funny and light hearted, with space shenanigans and an annoying af yet somewhat lovable narrator, and slowly gets darker and crazier as you go. Another one that develops a plot along the way and suddenly you’ve gone from “haha this idiot’s best friend is the spaceship’s AL system to ....what the fuck just happened?!”. It has some kickass female characters and the gift that is Isabel Lovelace, but not much of lgbt+ representation (as there’s really no romance in the podcast at all) until the very end and even then it’s only mentioned in passing, although some of the cast are lgbt+ in reality and the dynamics are left up to your own interpretation.

The Two Princes: A really short, happy, cheesy af podcast following two princes on their quest to defeat an enchanted forest and falling in love in the process. Super predictable but really funny and cute if you’re looking for an easy listen! And extra points for them casting Middle Eastern voice actors to play the Arab characters (one of the princes and both his parents). So full points for lgbt+ and poc representation!

EOS 10: Another space podcast! This one is set on a space station in the future and follows Dr Ryan Dalias, a tired bisexual who should probably get paid way more to deal with all the shit he has to deal with. A pretty funny, light hearted podcast for the most part with more lgbt characters that show up a bit later on. I haven’t listened to season 4 yet but the first 3 were pretty enjoyable!!

The Strange Case of Starship Iris: Space stories again but this time with lesbians! If you want to see space pirates and a baffled scientist trying to survive them and deny her attraction to one particular kickass female pirate, you’re gonna like this one. I haven’t listened to this one since s1 ended so my memory is shaky on it, but it’s got wlw characters, genderfluid characters, AND space pirates so it had to go on my rec list!

The Orbiting Human Circus (of the air): Don’t know how to describe this to you but it’s a whimsical dream-like story that follows Julian the janitor, who works at the Eiffel tower and spends his days dreaming of joining a fictional radio show. It’s strangely comforting and weird and guaranteed to make you feel emotional. The main character is gay, as confirmed by his (also gay) voice actor, but it only comes up in passing because the story doesn’t have any romance.

The TryPod: This is the only non-fictional podcast on this list, and I included it because I adore its hosts and the podcast makes me laugh a lot. A podcast run by The Try Guys, a youtuber group of four guys, who sit around for one hour and talk about everything under the sun. They’re genuinely funny without being mean to anyone, and Eugene Lee Yang our Asian gay icon always delivers on good opinions while Zach and Keith mess around, Ned tries to keep everyone in check, and Miles (their podcast producer) gives hilarious, weird af yet strangely useful advice!

Limetown: I debated whether or not I want to include this one because I didn’t like the second season much and therefore haven’t finished it, but the first season deserves the mention. This is presented as tapes recorded by a journalist investigating the disappearance of an entire town’s population, over three hundred people, that happened overnight ten years ago. A bit horror-y and chilling at times, but the first season is so good. There’s science and sci-fi elements involved.

Please let me know what you think if you listen to any of these, and happy listening 💕

#podcasts #podcast rec #podcast recommendations #asks #mara talks for ts #rec #lgbt stuff #Anonymous

52 notes · View notes

famedbasearchive · 4 years

Photo

OUR SONGS: EPISODES 3 & 4

Timeline: September 5, 2020, to October 10, 2020

On-Set Filming Dates: September 5, September 6, September 24, October 8

Deadline: October 1, 11:59PM KST

Those involved in Our Songs this month may earn up to 9 points total for writing, by the end of October 1 KST:

Completions of the two interviews included in the in-character prompt. (1 point each, up to 2 points total)

Up to two solo paras of 400+ words based on filming for episodes 3 & 4. (2 points each, up to 4 points total).

A thread of six posts (three per participant, including the starter) with another competing muse based on the Our Songs episode 4 and 5 schedule. This must be with a different muse than the thread you collected points for last month, if applicable. (2 points)

An aesthetic of the color assigned to the muse representing its tie in to the song they wrote. This should include a description. (1 point)

These do not count toward monthly limits or toward normal schedule points. All posts for this task block should be tagged with #fmdos2. Please remember the number of the above tasks completed by each muse will factor into eliminations during blocks with eliminations.

There are not tasks available for muses outside of the main cast for this task block.

IN-’VERSE INFO

Following the performances on September 5, the competitors will go backstage to their dressing rooms for a little under an hour while the audience is instructed to vote for two songwriters each. These votes will be calculated and combined with online track votes based on a weighted formula, and then the competitors are brought back out. They are first told the cast members that got the most votes in the live voting and the online as follows:

- Live audience vote: Kami - Online vote: Jaewon

The overall rankings with both voting combined and ranked are then announced from eighth place to first place as follows:

8. Joohwan 7. Eunah 6. Sun 5. Suji 4. Kami 3. Taeyong 2. Youngjoo 1. Jaewon

It is then announced that no one will be eliminated this episode, as the votes were surprisingly close between all competitors, but two competitors will be eliminated following the next round.

On September 6, the idols will once again return to the “recording studio” set they first met at on their first day of filming. Competitors will be seated based on their rank (first place in seat one, second place in seat two, etc.). Basic pleasantries will be gone through recounting the last round and reminding everyone of the rules and structure of the show before their attention is drawn to a table in the middle of the room with a box on it. One by one, each idol will go up in order of their ranking (first place first, second place second...) to the table. They will pull out a small, colored sheet of paper without explanation yet as to what this means. The colors drawn will be as follows:

Jaewon: White Youngjoo: Red Taeyong: Green Kami: Blue Suji: Black Sun: Purple Eunah: Gold Joohwan: Pink

After all competitors have drawn, they will return to their seats with their colored paper and Choi Jihoon will inform them of their second songwriting mission:

“As songwriters, you won’t always get the chance to write around around a theme as specific and personal as your own identity. A good songwriter should be able to take a simple concept and shape it into something memorable. They should also be versatile. For this task, you’ll be asked to write a song based on the color of the card you have pulled out of the box. How you interpret the color is up to you and you may take it as literally or as figuratively as you’d like. There’s only one catch: the song you write must contrast with the song you wrote for the first round in some way. This could be in genre, mood, themes, lyrics, or anything else you feel represents a strong contrast from your introduction.”

The competitors are given time to react to the prompt before the filming ends. Before leaving the building, each musician will film a talking head interview in a private room with a small team of cameras and producers where they are asked the following questions:

You’ve had some time since you found out your ranking in the last round. How do you feel about your ranking and what pressure do you feel it puts on you this round?

What are the first thoughts that come to mind when you think of the color you drew from the box?

Do you already have an idea in mind for what you’ll do for your song this round?

After seeing everyone compete in the first round and knowing the task for this round, has your view on your biggest competition changed? Who do you expect to do the best this round?

From September 6 to September 23, all competitors are given time to work on their songs and they will be filmed both through the stationary cameras installed in the studio in their company buildings and will also be instructed to continue to use their self-cam to record their creative process.

On September 24, all competitors will return to the recording studio set. The process for this filming will again be very similar to the last episode, with Choi Jihoon reminding everyone of the task and offering time for all of the competitors to discuss how their songwriting went among each other as a group conversation. Each competitor will then be asked to go back into the recording booth part of the set and give a live “recording” performance of the demo version of their song in front of the rest of the cast. This time, they will go in order of ranking from the last episode, from first to eighth (Jaewon → Youngjoo → Taeyong → Kami → Suji → Sun → Eunah → Joohwan). The rest of the cast will be filmed reacting to the performance and will be allowed to comment and give constructive criticism or praise following the end of each demo performance.

Final mastered versions of all songs are due to the production team by September 27.

On October 4, the final version of each competitor’s song for round two will be released onto streaming sites and voting will open for online audiences.

On October 8, all competitors will arrive to a venue in Mapo-gu, different from the one they performed at for the last episode. The venue is a real indoor concert venue and not just a set, and it has an intimate capacity made for live performances. The venue is frequented more by mid-tier singer-songwriter types than idols. The competitors won’t be aware they’re performing in a different setting until they arrive. The process here is the same, though: they will perform their songs to be voted on by a live audience. Minor prop elements are permitted, but they should be small and easy to store when the performer is not on stage. The respective companies will be responsible for the styling and performance preparation of their idols.

Once filming begins, the competitors will be informed they will be performing in order of their ranking from the latest episode. In case anyone has forgotten, the host will remind everyone what this order is. As everyone expects the show to proceed without anymore changes, Choi Jihoon reveals one last twist to the contestants: the show did not open online applications to draw a live audience by lottery like they did for the last episode, but, instead drew an audience entirely by having production assistants pass out flyers on the street for a concert by mystery artists. The audience is composed this time by passer-byers on the street who were interested in a secret concert and were willing to sign a release form for filming for broadcast television. The context of the concert was only revealed to the audience after they had all entered the venue. This is intended to give them an audience representative of the general public and the real music lovers of today and not only a crowd of eager fans. After this news, the performances will proceed as follows:

Jaewon - “Reply” (performance reference)

Youngjoo - "RUNNIN’ BACK” (performance reference)

Taeyong - “21″ (performance reference)

Kami - "Superwoman” (performance reference)

Suji - “Arari”

Sun - “Dystopia”

Eunah - “Count You Out”

Joohwan - "Whistle”

As each competitor is performing, the other seven songwriters will sit backstage together in a large dressing room while their reactions are filmed to a large monitor of the performance happening onstage. At the conclusion of each stage, each competitor will be given time to talk about their thoughts on the song that was just performed before the competitor who just performed returns to the room and is switched out for the next performer. In the final airing of the episode, only some competitors’ comments will be aired per song.

During the break following all eight song performances, each competitor will be pulled into a room for another talking head interview (admin note: please wait to complete this interview until all songs have been chosen and listed above):

Talk about your song. How does it contrast the song you wrote for the last round “Introduction / Identity”?

Did the different venue and audience atmosphere impact your performance in any way?

Which of the other songs/performances caught your attention the most?

Which song do you expect got the most votes?

OUT OF ‘VERSE INFO

As will be done with all rounds, the overall rankings for the first round were determined by random generation in groupings of the number of tasks completed. In this case, spots one through six were generated by those who had five completed tasks in the #fmdos1 tag on their muse’s blog by the deadline and spots seven and eight were randomly generated between the muses who had four completed tasks in the #fmdos1 tag on their blog by the deadline. (Posts must be in the appropriate tag on the muse’s blog before the deadline to count, but if there has been a mistake, please contact the admin, and if this is the case, the ranking will be fixed accordingly.) The only exception here is that the admin’s muse will not be eligible for the first place ranking unless they are the only muse who completes the most number of tasks. Proof shots of the name picker can be found here (note: admin is in EDT, while the deadline was in KST, so the names were drawn after the deadline for round one).

The winners for separate live voting and online voting were determined using weighted selection based on the randomly generated overall rankings. Rank one got eight submissions into the generator, rank two got seven, rank three got six, etc., and then names were drawn. Proof shots of the name picker results for this can be found here.

For this task block you will need to submit the following information: the song you would like to claim for your muse to create for this round’s task (and a performance reference if one is available) and the creative claims on it.

The form link will be uploaded here at 12AM KST September 5/11AM EDT September 4, twenty-four hours after this post goes up. The form link can be found here. A reminder of the limits of creative claims on each muse for the show can be found here. If you think there is a mistake or if a song is released that leads to a necessary update, please contact the main.

Songs Claimed:

Han Seungwoo - Reply

zai.ro - Whistle

Minzy - Superwoman

Leebada - RUNNIN’ BACK

Dean - 21

Lucia - Arari

Zico - Dystopia

Jimin Park - Count You Out

SONG LIMITATIONS/REQUIREMENTS

The simplified theme for this round is “Color / Contrast”. Please read the prompt in the in-’verse info for full details on what this means.

For all rounds, a song must fit all general rules of music claims (i.e. matches muse position, is not too explicit, must be by an artist in the Korean music industry, etc.) and must receive admin approval.

For this round, these are the additional limitations and requirements on songs that can be chosen:

The song must be solo. This means it cannot be a collab or have a feature.

In real life, the song must not be a title track according to Melon and cannot have an official MV. Special clips, live clips, choreography videos, and minimal production lyric videos are acceptable, but the song will have to be re-released on an album in the future to claim such videos as canon to the universe.

In real life, the song cannot have charted higher than a tank of 75 on Gaon’s Weekly Digital Chart at any point.

You may claim songs with choreography, but choreography creative claims are not available. Choreography will only be performed during the final stage with the live audience, not the demo performance for the cast. As usual, songs with more emphasis on complex choreography should be reserved for muses with dance positions.

#fmdbase #fmdoursongs #fmdos2 #fmdjoosung #eunahfmd #fmdjoohwan #fmdjaewon #fmdxsuji #fmdtaeyong #fmdxyoungjoo #fmdkami #queued post

1 note · View note

d6official · 5 years

Text

K-POP GROUP DAY6 GEAR UP FOR WORLD TOUR WITH NEW EP ‘THE BOOK OF US: GRAVITY’

While DAY6 are known for producing some of the most heart-tugging alternative rock songs in the Korean music industry, the band under JYP Entertainment amps up the tempo and showcase their fluidity on their new EP, The Book of Us: Gravity.

The new EP features six new self- written and composed songs by members Jae, Sungjin and Young K, including the band's new single, "Time of Our Life." The release of Gravity on Monday (July 15) follows news of the group's world tour, which kicks off August in Seoul. Making their way around the world with 31 stops, DAY6 will dedicate the month of September for their stops in the U.S. Starting with a two-night show at the PlayStation Theater in New York (September 12 and 13), the band will visit five more cities before concluding in Los Angeles (September 28 and 29).

The quintet, comprised of Jae, Sungjin, Young K, Wonpil and Dowoon, made their debut under JYP Entertainment in 2015 with their EP, The Day. Though they may not be your typical dancing K-pop idol group, each member of the band plays a crucial role in weaving their instrumental talents and vocals.

Below, Jae and Young K discuss the change in tempo on their new album, their music process, favorite anime and their upcoming tour.

You’re back with new music and you’re about to embark on your biggest tour to date. Has the feeling settled in?

Jae: We’re excited because this album's a little different. We’ve gotten a lot of idea contributions; everything that we’ve experienced, we feel, we share, we see is kind of portrayed in our music whether we like it or not and I think that’s a good thing because it’s good to be honest. But as for our upcoming world tour we are super excited because we get to see everybody again

There are more cities than there were before. Which are you most excited to visit?

Jae: One, especially for Wonpil, is Milan. He’s always wanted to visit Italy and his favorite soccer team in Italy is AC Milan. In general we are always excited because new places give us new experiences, which gives us really good memories as well as new experiences that we can put back into our music. Anywhere period is always great for us.

Your new single, “Time of Our Lives,” has a change in tempo compared to your past releases. What triggered this change?

Jae: It wasn’t so much that we sat down and decided, "Guys, we need to change the tempo,” but I guess, especially during our last world tour, we felt like there was a necessity for more concert-geared music, you know what I mean? There are a lot of songs where everyone is jumping and everyone is having a real good time. We wanted to be able to really tap in and connect with the audience, our fans and the people who come to watch our shows a little bit more. For example, in the middle of the song if there’s a clap section everyone can clap along. I guess, with that in mind, we started on the new album and a lot of concert-oriented music came out. Therefore, our title song just became the BPM that it is. I don’t think it necessarily was like... we said, “We need to make it faster." We make what we like to make.

I read it as a song of hope and I thought it embodies the sound of someone who is about to embark on a new chapter in their lives, which comes across even more clearly when you read the lyrics. It made me think of it as an OST to your lives as a band. Which brings me to my next question: What is your favorite anime?

Young K: For me it’s definitely One Piece; I’ve been watching it since I was very young. Recently, I started re-watching it from Episode 1 up until the most recent episode, which took me like 3 months. I watch it all the time

Jae: For me it’s Your Lie in April. Not because it’s music-oriented, but it’s definitely my favorite. I don’t watch anime, I read manga and it definitely contains the saddest pages of manga I’ve ever seen.

You two are usually involved in producing and writing your music; can you walk me through your musical process?

Young K: It differs from song to song. Sometimes it can happen from a guitar riff or bass riff or a lyric idea. Sometimes I come up with a melody, but most of the time we come up with a track first and then everybody gets together and we just sing along as if it’s a song that we already know. Then we compare each melody to each other’s and we choose the best one. We then write down the lyrics and record.

Is there an instance where you guys just hum it first and you’re like, “Oh this could be a something!”?

Young K: Sometimes we do that, but most of the time we just come up with a track and when the guitar instrumental is playing everybody just writes down the melody.

Jae: I feel like that’s how a lot of music creators in Western areas like North America make music these days. They take a track, sing over it and sing over it again then cut out pieces and mix and match to make a good song. We have four members that all do that, so it’s a little bit easier for us I think.

Young K, since you write a lot of the songs, what inspires you? Do you take influence from movies or real life events?

Young K: I guess the experiences that I had when I was living in Canada helped me a lot. I used to live alone, away from my parents, so I got to live a very free life. Those experiences helped me a lot, but at one point I got stuck with writer’s block. I needed inspiration from anywhere at that point so daily conversations and sometimes movies. Movies have influenced 3 or 4 songs. There’s the song “Man in a Movie” which was inspired by the movie Me Before You.

Is there anyone who you’d love to write a song for?

Young K: I’ve always wanted to write a song about my father and dedicate it to him. But I’ve always been afraid to, I feel like I need to know more about life in order to sing about him. I always feel like I’m too young. For example, in this album there’s a song called “Cover (포장).” We came up with the track first and when I was writing with Sungjin he wanted to write about our fathers, but I said, “No, not yet. Let’s talk about something else.” So instead we talked about covering ourselves up. And for an artist maybe I would like to write for ... I’ve never thought of it. Jae as a solo artist, that’s my answer! Maybe all of the DAY6 members as solo artists!

Like a special album?

Young K: Mhm, like everybody writing for each other.

Jae: I think it’s also because Young K, when he writes melodies, he’s really good at thinking about what that person would sound like and making it best match them. Even with the lyrics it’s easier for us to sing when we have to sing them.

Your music speaks to thousands of fans worldwide. What do you do in your times of struggle? Whenever you’re stressed or struggling, what do you do or what music do you listen to?

Young K: Well, I’m not the type of guy who listens to music when I’m stressed because most of the stress comes from music. Before, when I was younger, I could enjoy music without thinking, but now when I listen to music I always think, "Oh, I could use this from here” and so on. So I tend not to listen to music. If I’m stressed, and I have time, I usually travel.

Jae: I think I agree with Young K because we’re always on and off writing songs, no matter what our schedule is, when we listen to music now the first thing we always catch isn’t an enjoyment of the song. It’s more like, “Oh! He did this with this?” or “He used this kind of arrangement with this kind of melody here? This guy's wild, bro.” Even if we don’t want it to be, and we do enjoy this process a lot, it’s just that it does become somewhat hard. I guess I cool my head off by playing a lot of games. But the most important thing about the games is that it’s with friends over voice chat. There are friends from overseas that I can’t always see and that’s always kinda nice. Because speaking English is nice.

Are there any words you have for fans who are going through tough times?

Jae: I think something that we really focus on, via melody or lyrically, is that our songs are songs that people can really vibe with. Not just musically, but lyrically they understand where we’re coming from and they have felt it. Whether it’s growing pains or whatever emotion it was at that point in life, you know? And if they vibe with that, if they’re feeling heartbreak through our song or if they’re feeling joyful through our song because our song is emitting that kind of aura, then we really just wanna say thank you because that’s all we want. That’s all we ever want. So I guess just a really big thank you to everyone that’s really feeling through our songs.

Considering you two somewhat kick-started your music careers through YouTube, almost more than a decade ago, what changes have you seen in Korean music while it continues to make its way globally?

Jae: I feel like when we were younger K-pop, at least in my environment or my neighborhood, it was hard to openly say like, “I really like K-pop”; especially to non-Asian friends. But now that it’s becoming a little bit more accepted and gaining popularity in the global scene I feel like a lot of people are going to be a little bit more open to that kind of music in general. I feel like, for all musicians in general, any genre opening up to the world is an opportunity for everyone else, whether they’re in K-pop or not, to further deliver their music to people who haven’t listened to them. So, positive-good vibes.

Speaking of, can we expect a JaeSix comeback soon? Everyone’s asking.

Jae: So, me and the boys have been planning a little bit, about things that we could do. I can’t promise when, but it will definitely come. We’ve been plotting.

Alright, I’m excited for that. While speaking of the tour, if there is something the world must know about you guys before you conquer their cities, what would it be?

Young K: The energy that we get from the audience and that we can share with them.

Jae: If you’re coming to our show, if you listen to our music, bring all of your baggage. Bring all of your stress, bring all of your worries because we’re gonna settle that. It’s gonna be a good night.

#day6 #park jaehyung #youngk #t: article #t: interview #190716

37 notes · View notes

thearkhound · 5 years

Text

Exploring the Secret Behind Konami’s MSX Games (September 1988)

Akira Yamashita/山下章 is a game journalist whom I covered in the past. He was a writer for Micom BASIC Magazine who later become one of the founders for Studio Bentstuff. One of his regular features he wrote for Micom BASIC was a series of game reviews titled Honki de Play, Honne de Review (which translates to Serious Play, Sincere Review) where he would not only write an in-depth review of a recently-released game, but would also interview the developer to discuss the concepts behind the games themselves.

For the September 1988 issue, rather than reviewing a specific game, Yamashita-san decided to do an overview of Konami’s MSX library, focusing primarily on their shoot-’em-up lineup. Most westerners (specifically North Americans) are only familiar with the MSX thanks to the fact that Metal Gear originated on that platform, but Konami has actually produced a variety of quality games for the MSX that rivaled what they were also released on the NES and arcades at the time. I’m hoping this article will inspire some of you readers to explore the rest of Konami’s MSX library as well.

I might consider translating more installments of Yamashita-san’s Serious & Sincere series of articles in the future.

Going to Konami

The Konami Building at Port Island, Kobe. The first floor is the lobby and the second floor is reception office. All floors above those are dedicated to the development departments. There’s a PC floor, a Famicom floor, an arcade floor, ect.

When you mention “Konami” to anyone involved with the publishing business in Japan, they’ll immediately think of the Konami building at Jimbocho, Tokyo, but that’s mainly the division of Konami involved with sales and advertising. The development department of Konami that makes their games for the arcades, PC and Famicom [NES] is actually located in a huge building in Kobe. If I was going to write to write an article for my “Serious & Sincere” series, then I thought I would fly over to Kobe and talk to the actual developers (although, Mr. Kage, who accompanied me for this interview, wanted to go to Jimbocho to meet Ms. Kamio).

We’ve arrived at the much rumored Port Island [an artificial island in Kobe] after four hours of commuting from Tokyo via the Shinkansen bullet train and such after 4 hours. In fact, this was the site of the Portopia tournament held several years ago. The place is very similar to Heiwajima in Tokyo [another artificial island] but without the boats. The Konami Building is located at the north side of the island, although the design is a bit different from the one depicted in their TwinBee. The surrounding area is peaceful and full of greenery. A couple of nearby middle-aged women that were dropped off from a sight-seeing bus began chatting when they saw the Konami Building.

“Such a lovely building! But what does Konami sell?”

“My kid really likes them. I think they make candy.” (This story also includes some embellishment)

Even though we weren’t under a strict schedule, we quickly proceeded to Konami Industry’s headquarters, where we interview Mr. Fukutake, the manager of the MSX department about various things. In this article I decided to mix my own opinions with the comments of Mr. Fukutake himself.

Up to this point, my Serious & Sincere article series were focused on showcasing the merits and exploring the development of specific games, for this installment I’ve decided to focus on Konami’s MSX library in general.

The Branding and Colors of a Software Publisher.

Akira Yamashita (right) interviewing Shigeru Fukutake. The interview was held in a seemingly luxurious VIP room with an exceptionally large marble table in the middle.

As our readers might be aware of, the development period of recent gaming software is pretty long compared to software from long ago. The days in which a single programmer can sell a single program by him or herself are now gone. Most software publishers now have a development department that divide their work by coding, story writing, music and graphics.

The long development process naturally means that every single game in development will be given full focus and the games that were planned with much “emotional attachment” will go through a long-term effort from the developers until it finally sees the light of day.

Have you noticed that their “emotional attachment” have materialized in their recent games in such interesting ways?

Those are the “colors” of a software publisher. It’s possible to imagine the kind of games a publisher releases just by mentioning their name. For example, Koei is known for their strategy games, Riverhill Software is known for their mystery adventures, Telenet is known for their colorful side-scrolling games and Dempa is known for their arcade ports.

How is the "emotional attachment” and the “colors” connected? There is a single answer. Each software house has its own idealized image of a game from its staff members. The ideal of that game in this instance is an approximation of the company’s "colors”. The energy they use is to pursue this ideal game must then represent the “emotional attachment” of the staff.

There are many examples of “colors” when it comes to other industries. In the Japanese TV industry, Tokyo Broadcasting System is associated with dramas, Fuji TV is associated with variety shows and Nippon Television is (perhaps) associated with giant battles. For the record industries, we have Canyon for idols, CBS Epic Sony for pop music, Crown and King for enka and Scitron is known for their video game music albums (we’re kidding about Scitron).

The fact that there is such “color-coding” for publishers that let us know their intentions might be a good thing for consumers like ourselves. In a sense, the PC gaming industry might had already entered a more mature age compared to the days when software publishers would flood the market with the same type of game depending on what was trending at the moment.

Moreover, with the progress of such “color-coding” is leading to the establishment of “brand names” for PCs and software. In other words, purchasing a game from a particular publisher will determine whether it’ll be a sure bet or not.

It would be no exaggeration to say that when it comes to brand names, Konami’s brand is the strongest among MSX game publishers. Mr. Fukutake, the manager of Konami’s MSX team, has the following to say on the matter.

“That's correct. The fact that our users can trust us makes us happy as creators. We’re striving to maintain Konami’s brand image that we established.”

The Way Konami Games Are Made

The rarely-seen development room of Konami’s MSX department. This room was only accessible to employees who were assigned an ID card..

Up until now, the development process of Konami’s MSX games seemed to had been a secret. Here will be explaining the development process as answered by Mr. Fukutake himself.

First of all, there are two types of MSX games produced by Konami. The first kind are arranged conversions of existing arcade games (such as Gradius or TwinBee), while the other kind are original types (which include Metal Gear, The Maze of Galious and many others) . Arranged ports of arcades seem to progress by measuring the hardware capabilities of the MSX, but the original games are naturally much more interesting. The process is a bit different in which it seems that the person who comes up with the game’s characters is also the person assigned to do the planning and the story. In other words, the person who came up with characters such as Popolon or Pengin-kun was in charge of planning and facilitating the development of Knightmare or Penguin Adventure.

The planner will then lead a team formed by around four or five employees and then they will proceed with the development of a single game, which lasts somewhere around four to six months. With somewhere between 20 to 30 personnel employed by Konami’s MSX development department, that means there are’s a total of 5 or 6 teams each working on 2 games a year if you think about it simply, which explains Konami’s surprising release pace.

The only exception here are the music staff. A sound technology department within Konami is responsible for all the music in their arcade, PC and NES games. That’s why the music in all Konami games have a certain unified image to them.

The Relentless Obsession With Shoot-’Em-Ups

The main subject is finally here. When talking about Konami games on the MSX, the most important thing to mention is their shoot-’em-up line represented by the Gradius series. As someone who likes Konami’s shooters, I make sure to always buy them when they’re released (never got one as a gift) and enjoy them.

However, in an industry which believes the theory that shoot-’em-ups are never hits, Konami is one of the rare exceptions to that belief. All the games in the Gradius series released thus far (Gradius, Gradius 2, Salamander and Parodius) have all have a track record for staying in the top ten best-selling MSX games for extensive periods.

This seems to be a phenomenon unique to the MSX market when comparing it to other market. Silpheed for example, which I consider to the best shoot-’em-up for Japanese PCs, didn’t chart that much and I heard that the shoot-’em-up masterpieces on the Famicom that were Gradius and Zanac, weren’t quite hits.

Why are Konami’s MSX shoot-’em-ups the only ones that are selling? There might be many reasons, but the primary reason is because Konami makes its games with the key point being firmly “fun shooting”. A variety of stages, unique power-up systems, crisp music and a miraculous balance, all blend perfectly to create Konami’s unique flavor. Mr. Fukutake says “No matter what, we live and breathe shoot-’em-ups. Everyone in our staff are enthusiastic fans of shoot-’em-ups. We wish to continue our lineup no matter how much the market changes.”

Perhaps this passion for betting on the shoot-’em-up genre might be the secret that has lead to the creation of masterpieces.

The Difficulty of Difficulty Settings

One of the components that determines whether a shoot-’em-up is fun is the difficulty level. On one hand, if you make it too easy, you won’t get to savor it much. On the other hand, if you make it too hard, it will become inaccessible. Thus, the difficulty of a shoot-’em-up, much like an RPG, must be adjusted with fine-tuning.

Mr. Fukutake reveals Konami’s policy for difficulty adjustment.

“For arcade games, we make them easy to get into in the beginning. But since shoot-’em-ups for the MSX are meant to be played at home, we make them difficult from the very beginning.”

Indeed. Konami’s shoot-’em-ups are considerably difficult (only hardcore players might argue otherwise). If anything, the difficulty is adjusted to a level that it can only be cleared with continues the first time. Without enough practice, it is difficult to complete them without using continues.

But unlike an arcade game, such as Gradius II, where dying once means that you’re done for (it’s not impossible to recover, but it’s difficult for ordinary players), here it’s only a setback that can be managed with a continue. You press the F5 key [at the game over] while thinking that “this time” [you’ll beat it]. It is an experience that only people who played Konami’s shoot-’em-ups on the MSX will be familiar with.

I think Konami adjusts their difficulty settings around this continue feature to some extent. Perhaps they’re aiming for the same sense of satisfaction when you clear one of their shoot-’em-ups that a player would also feel when solving an RPG or an adventure game. At the very least, I found myself impressed by the continue feature without knowing it when I’ve completed the game after struggling during a hard battle.

This is not something that could be managed easily even with the know-how. It’s not flattery or anything. It’s what I expect from Konami.

About Salamander

For me, the only Konami shoot-’em-up I was unreasonable with its difficulty was Salamander. Even if you keep continue, the sense of hopelessness is strong after dying once, unless you bring up Player 2′s ship as a decoy and start gradually recovering all your power-ups again. There are special weapons that only be used when both players’ ships unite, but they’re not very practical since they have limited uses and they feel pretty weak. And finally, the true ending is locked away and is accessible by having a Gradius 2 cartridge on the second slot. Isn’t that a bit too much?

Konami’s Future on the MSX

There is more stuff that I want to write about Konami, but I can’t due to the limited amount of pages. So I decided end this article asking Mr. Fukutake about Konami’s upcoming MSX games.

“Gaming trends will keep changing in the future, but we don’t just want to pursue what’s popular, we want to make whatever we want and keep on making something that is true to Konami. Since games are expensive, we want to make products that suit their prices so that you won’t be disappointed with your purchase. How do you maintain such level of quality and not shatter the image we’ve created thus far? That is our next challenge.”

Indeed, the quality must remain above a certain level, but that’s easier said than done. Not just Konami, but any company that has grown in size will have a certain quota of games to release for the year and because of the reliance on external staff to meet this quota, there’s a risk that the quality will deteriorate. Although it’s not noticeable, some companies in the Famicom business are already going for a “quantity over quality” strategy (I won’t mention any names though).

I don’t want Konami’s MSX team to fall into the same trap. On the contrary, I believe Konami, who are the best brand on the MSX, must continue producing quality games and lead the MSX market as their mission. As long as Konami keeps pumping out quality games, the MSX will never fade away.

No matter what, please continue making games with the industry in mind. Never forget your original intentions. I’m looking forward to the upcoming Snatcher and their newest shoot-’em-up Parodius, as well as the supposedly “unachievable” SCC II.

I would like to thank everyone who helped me out with this article and I apologize for my rough words.

Konami’s Shoot-’Em-Up Series

Gradius [English title: Nemesis] - The MSX version of Gradius was released shortly after the Famicom version. It was notable for the additional boneyard stage, which did not exists in the original arcade game. At any rate, the fact that Gradius could be played on an MSX1 was pretty impressive to begin with.

Gradius 2 [English title: Nemesis 2] - The long-rumored sequel to Gradius made its debut on the MSX. New weapons, such as the upward laser were added, and a new storyline began depicting the conflict against Dr. Venom. It was the first MSX game to employ the SCC chip.

Salamander - The most difficult game in Konami’s shoot-’em-up library. The structure of the MSX version is completely different from the original arcade game, since Stages 3-5 can be played at any order. I was glad to see that some of the music and the power-up system from the revised Life Force edition of the game were incorporated.

Parodius - A shoot-’em-up parody that turns everything into a gag. The bosses are all unique like the giant drunk penguin, the badly-drawn monk and the eyeball. It’s notable for having the shortest development time of all Konami games, taking less than two months for the master version to be completed.

Other Notable Konami Games

Majō Densetsu [English title: Knightmare] - One of Konami’s earliest MSX games from the pre-Megarom era that was lauded as a masterpiece among players. The idea for the game is believed to be an arrangement of Konami’s arcade game titled Finalizer.

Yumetairiku Adventure [English title: Penguin Adventure] - A sequel to Konami’s early hit Antarctic Adventure that greatly improves upon its predecessor. The cute design of the penguin protagonist made it popular among female players.

Akumajō Dracula [English title: Vampire Killer] - Although based on a Famicom game, it is a masterpiece considered to be one of the top 5 games of Konami. With its high-sense soundtrack and wonderful balance, it still has many firmly-rooted fans

Galious no Meikyū [English title: The Maze of Galious] - The sequel to Knightmare. It employs a system where the player switches between Popolon and his lover Aphrodite. The game is now a full-fledged action RPG with many difficult mysteries to solve.

Metal Gear - A military-themed action RPG like nothing that came before. Its idea of avoiding conflict with the enemy by sneaking pass their blind spots is novel. The game was later ported to the Famicom.

F1 Spirit - A record-setting racing game that continues to sell to this day. The secret to its lasting popularity is due to its 2-players simultaneous mode, the option to choose the parts for your vehicle and its variety of courses.

Shalom - The conclusion to the Knightmare and also Konami’s first adventure game. The top-down exploration screens bring to mind the Dragon Quest series, but the game switches to a side-view action segment when the player confronts a boss.

Gekitotsu Pennant Race - It seems like an average baseball game, but the included WATCH mode is fun. You can create your own team and have it compete against one made by a friend.

Coming Soon: Snatcher, a Cyberpunk Adventure

Konami’s first truly authentic adventure is Snatcher, which appears to be inspired by Blade Runner. There will be an MSX2 version that consists of 3 disks and an original sound cartridge and a version for NEC PC-8801SR computers that consists of 5 disks The programmer in charge is said to be the same person who worked on Gradius 2, so I’m looking forward to it. “It’s an adventure game like nothing that came before” says Mr. Fukutake. In contrast to Parodius, Snatcher has had the longest development time out of any Konami game released thus far (8 months as of this interview). It is scheduled to be released by the end of November.

#Konami #Micom BASIC Magazine #akira yamashita #Shigeru Fukutake #MSX #Gradius #Metal Gear #Castlevania #snatcher #Parodius #Salamander

15 notes · View notes

jobrosupdates · 5 years

Text

The Jonas Brothers Are Getting Used to Being Interviewed Again | VICE

We met the brothers in a deserted London bar, to talk about the past decade and how they finally care enough about pop music to return to it.

The Jonas Brothers don’t know where to sit. We’re standing in a cordoned-off area in the sort of central London bar that resembles the results of a greenhouse and fancy department store’s brief fling. The three siblings eye up four identical green, lip-shaped couches in each corner of the room. “Maybe we should take one each and just shout at each other,” Joe says with a grin.

I laugh nervously, hoping he’s not serious, before suggesting that he and his older brother, Kevin, plop themselves on one sofa, while Nick, wearing a very noisy jacket made of plastic, makes himself comfortable on a red stool. Kevin settles in first, but not before moving four slightly lukewarm coffees onto a low table.

Joe seems buoyant; the other two not so much. “I got some good rest last night, so I'm doing pretty good,” he says, picking up a cup and taking a sip. “I don't know if they got the most amount of sleep. But I had a massage at the hotel and it just put me in a deep, deep sleep.” When I glance at Nick, his face is blank. He doesn’t seem as impressed with his brother’s gentle gloating.

Still, six years ago you might’ve thought that the Jonas Brothers wouldn’t ever trade brotherly jibes with each other in front of a music journalist again. But here they are, promoting their first album in ten years, Happiness Begins. In the US, its lead single, “Sucker” became not only their first Billboard Hot 100 number 1, but the first from a boyband in the US since B2K's "Bump, Bump, Bump" in 2003 ("Sucker" peaked at 4 on the UK charts). They’ve also announced a world tour, done the requisite carpool karaoke – they’re back back.

A newer band might be climbing the walls with excitement at such success. The JoBros, however, have been through this rigmarole of travel, promo, album, tour before. Not that they’re fully jaded – they tell me how happy they are that people still give shit about them – but, rather, they’re reserved. And given what they’ve been through over the past decade, I get it. Happiness might now be beginning, but it’s been difficult to find. A little hesitation is natural.

Now, for the story every super-fan already knows. After starting small, as a teen pop punk act in 2005, the band signed to Disney’s Hollywood Records in 2006 and immediately blew up. In the US, they were the teen pop phenomenon of the late 00s, starring in sitcoms, movies and selling millions of records. But slogging it as poster boys for Disney purity for seven years can leave you in pop purgatory, unable to evolve. In 2013, when they released “Pom Poms”, it was clear that the band had failed to mature with their fans. The song stalled at number 60 on the Hot 100, while its follow up, “First Time”, failed to chart in the UK overall.

youtube

Not that they seemed that bothered by that commercial plummet. What they had was broken and when I ask if they were disappointed that the rest of that material never got released, Joe and Kevin both give off something between a huff and a grim laugh. “Truth is, we weren't really happy with the material and didn't feel like we were artistically in sync,” Nick says quickly, his jacket crinkling as he sits forward on his stool. “It’s one of the reasons the group ended. And we were isolating ourselves and limiting our creative potential because we didn't know if we could really progress.”

"I think we were all in such different places,” Joe adds. “Kevin was starting his life with [his wife] Danielle. Nick and I were in and out of relationships. We'd get in the studio and we couldn't land on anything lyrically. I wasn't as inspired to be in there. It kind of felt like I was just going through the motions and I knew that the music would be created” no matter what, with or without passion. “So I'd come in when I was needed. I just wasn't connecting with what we were creating.”

Why not get new writers, you might ask? Well, the Jonas Brothers’ involvement in the writing process felt, to them, fundamental. Sure, their breakthrough hit was a cover of a Busted song, but “Burning Up”, “SOS”, “Love Bug” and “A Little Bit Longer” were legitimately strong pop songs, and their own. Anyway, their lack of musical progression had incubated a fear of rejection. “Knowing that things were on the decline,” Nick says, “I was afraid that we would ask to work with someone and they would say no.” Panicked, he called a meeting and in 2013, mid-way through recording a new record, he broke up the band.

The next bit is well-trodden. Nick buffed up, posed in his underwear and released one of the greatest post-boyband pop songs of all time, “Jealous”. Joe joined dance pop group DNCE. Kevin retreated into family life. He had two children, Alena in 2014 and Valentina two years later. It wasn’t that simple, though. “I didn't even know if I wanted to do music again,” Joe says now. The air isn’t tense but sombre and Nick’s eyes are cast to the floor. “I had to find my own place. I went on and worked on different projects, but it took time to get inspired. Nick had that all figured out. I just didn’t.”

Meanwhile, Kevin says that he was hurt. Joe and Nick had performed as the Jonas Brothers at a final gig without him and, after the birth of his first child, he felt like he didn’t have his best friends. “It's not that I said that I didn't want to do music anymore, but I think, looking back at it, there was some pain there. So I wanted to look at some other passions of my own and see what else was out there.”

As they talk, each brother is careful to allow the other to share their piece. Nick especially is quiet, often faced away from his brothers examining something off in another corner of the room. They’re respectful, almost detached, as if they’ve plodded through that murky period with the wounds, scars and wariness to prove it. The last six years, the brothers tell me, was about rediscovering their relationships as a family. Once Kevin's kids brought them together, “We made time where we could just rebuild as friends," Joe says," not even bring up anything music-related. We didn't really dive into that stuff. We just said, 'Let's just move on.'” Moving on, in this case, involved making 90-minute documentary, Chasing Happiness.

“It seems like a jump,” Joe agrees when I put it to him, before Nick cuts him off for the first time.

“We were made aware of some offers that were coming in for a Jonas Brothers reunion,” he says, carefully. “There was one at that point which could have made sense. Kevin flew out to LA and we talked through it but not everyone was on board.” He eyes Joe. “But it opened up a dialogue about what we could do together, to touch on that period of our lives.” Nick and Kevin flew to go and meet Joe while he was acting as a coach on The Voice Australia. Aside from a dinner in London a year prior, that meeting was the first chunk of time the three brothers had together, just as a trio. Nick, though, hankered after a reunion. And so, like any responsible adults, they decided a play a game where they got drunk and aired out their grievances to figure out their shit. It worked.

After ironing out the details, the Jonas Brothers were soon recording music as a group again, pulling in pop producer and writer names with the weight of a few tonnes: Max Martin, Shellback, Justin Tranter, Greg Kurstin and Ryan Tedder (Tedder executive produced the album). For Kevin, though, it was a learning curve. In the six years he’d been out of the game, a lot had changed. Session writing, streaming and the way that digital communication has opened up the songwriting process has altered not only how people make music, but how they consume it. “There's been so many times where I've asked them, 'Is this a good metric to look at?'” he says, almost sheepishly, “Streaming wasn't really a thing. The way, dynamically, you work with your label, to pretty much all of it has changed.”

Thankfully, the music on Happiness Begins is really good. “I Believe”, which Nick wrote with Kurstin, sits between “Jealous” and the slick romance of “Hold On We’re Going Home”, while “Every Single Time”, a reggae-lite bop produced by Tedder, could easily have belonged to DNCE. And unlike a lot of current pop, you really can’t imagine anyone else singing a song like “Only Human”, a wonky horn-filled track that, when pushed, could be described as baby’s first foray into ska, or lead single “Sucker”, that grabs those Jonas power chords and drags them into 2019. It’s the Jonas Brothers on a molecular level.

I catch their publicist waving at me to wrap things up. The band have a photoshoot next and then they’re playing an intimate gig for fans. But as we all stand up and exchange pleasantries, I tell them I’m glad that they’ll finally be able to spend a holiday like Thanksgiving together as friends. They all pause and look at each other awkwardly. “We do have a day off and we'll be in the New Jersey area,” Kevin says. “We could go to your house?” Nick asks. I turn to Joe. “Oh, we have no idea,” he shrugs. “We're still bandmates at the end of the day. We're just trying to figure it all out.” And with that they file out of the room.

Source: VICE

#jonas brothers #vice #text #article #interview #2019

34 notes · View notes

crudely-drawn-ben · 5 years

Text

A little history of the Silk Houses and the Lunzideren

When Stu denied the existence of any document providing context on the Lunzideren, this is the document he was claiming never to have seen....

Silk House Leadership

The Old Houses

There are four old houses, Black House, Red House, Emerald House and Blue House. They have existed for hundreds of years. Lunzideren histories record that Black House was the first of the great dye houses and with the true dye the arts of Silk Command began to be developed. Red House, Emerald House and Blue House were all formed within a century of the first discovery of the true dye process.

Not long after the four houses were formed there was a civil war between them that weakened the Lunzideren in general to the point that they were effectively conquered by Ganbaxir (Ganbataar) a leader of the Riding People who had fought as mercenaries for all sides during the war and spotted an opportunity to gain power. For a brief period a little over five hundred years ago, Ganbaxir was effectively emperor of the steppe.

After Ganbaxir’s death his children divided the clans of the riding people, giving the Lunzideren the opportunity to reclaim their city and their own governance. At this point the rolling citadel was constructed using the forges of the Waren who live beneath the plains. This framework, built on many wheels included the bracing and the chains that allow the sky whales to draw it across the plain, freeing them from the whims of the wind and allowing the enduring structures of Hazer city to be built on it.

The New Houses

Just under a century ago, a group of dyemasters tired of the fact that they were limited by not belonging to one of the dye house families, found a way to create true dyes and made a second set of dyestones. Around these they created three new houses, Cyan, Crimson and Yellow. Although the nature of the stones and the processes built on them is a closely guarded secret, it is widely known that the new and old houses have different processes with parallel outcomes. The new houses ensured they had village support before introducing themselves at the city and although it was a significant upheaval, the House Accords are signed, granting them legitimacy.

The House Accords

1. No house will interfere with the Dye Process of any other house and nobody can belong to more than one house. The powers and instruments of the dye processes of each house are a hidden bond that holds them together and nobody outside each house has the right to this knowledge.

2. No house will cause harm either deliberately or through knowing inaction to the Hemu of any house.

3. The High Ones are above the dye houses, their work is not to be interfered with, lest we lose their favour.

4. A house may be assigned a change of leader by the other houses in two situations: if the leader dies without heir OR by the unanimous verdict of the leaders of every other house in a situation where these accords have been breached and no lesser remedy exists.

5. A house has the right to govern its own people, but such governance may not impinge upon the right of another house to govern their people. Governance always flows from citizen to hemu to house.

6. No house may ignore a request from another house for assistance on a problem of governance.

7. A house may call a meeting of the houses in a situation where there is a threat to all of them either from within or without the community of the Lunzideren.

Lann City

Fifty years ago most of the guards of Black House were lured away by a series of attacks on their Hemu, going to seek the cause of the problem. In their absence most senior figures in the Black House, including its leader, Hazer Wen and almost everyone else in the command structure. To preserve order the Blue ( Lann ) House step in and take over the running of the city, when the guards return, with Hazer Wen at their head, the coup was complete, Lann House had taken control of the city ( without touching Hazer assets ) and it is renamed as Lann city.

The Night Of Red Knives

Twenty three years ago, Emerald and Red houses were shown to be working together to disadvantage Blue house, operating in secret outside of Lann City to avoid being caught- Grandmother Chi is adamant that this was itself some kind of fit-up. Blue called a meeting of the houses and argued that the Red and Emerald houses were in breach of the Accords and the meeting grew very heated as every recent grievance was aired among the Old Houses, with the New Houses unsure of who, if anyone, to support. That night assassins walked the streets of Lann city, seeking out the leadership of all three of the old houses. In the meantime carefully prepared teams from the New Houses, constructed from their most able and trusted personnel, set about breaking in to the old house carriage-manors with the goal of stealing the dye-stones, the endgame of a long-constructed plan on the part of the new houses. The leaders of Red and Blue house were assassinated that night, but the thefts were also thwarted because the old houses had their own spies among the new houses, and they too had played a long game. The Emerald house knew the plan of those aiming to steal from them and set careful traps, capturing the thieves. The Blue house had simply hidden their dyestone outside the city and among those stealing from the Red house was one of their own scouts, who had been concealed in the Crimson House for twenty years.

The consequence was uproar. The leaders of all three new houses were executed, along with their entire families, Hazer Wen was censured on the belief that they were aware of the attack and had chosen not to intervene - in spite of the fact that the other Old Houses must also have known of the danger to prepare their responses - but the Old Houses were also weakened, all of them having lost senior people to the assassins that night.

Most of the current leadership of the silk houses was appointed after those events.

Notable figures within the leadership of the Silk Houses:

Red

Hong Hu

Leader of the Red House, an older halfling, noted for his intelligence.

Hong Wei

Hong Hu’s heir and his natural inheritor, seldom seen among society because of long-term illness.

Hong Xing

Hong Hu’s consort, well liked.

Emerald

Tantwey Ye

A famous trophy hunter in her day and still hunts when she can. Human.

Blue

Lann Sear

A well known diplomat and governor general of Lann City. Also a talented artist. Halfling. A relatively recent appointee - as of about five years ago - having been assistant to the former leader of the house for most of her life.

Black

Hazer Wen

The leader of the Black House, famously only appears in robes of the True Black, face covered by a veil. Has always been the leader of the Black House.

Hazer Lao

First heir of the Black House, should anything happen to Hazer Wen he.stands to inherit the leadership of the house. A famous duelist.

Hazer Say

Second heir of the Black house, well regarded for her work on history and plant lore.

Hazer Xun

Second daughter of Hazer Wen, a diplomat and expert on communications with the High Ones.

Cyan

Chinser Lu

The leader of the Cyan House since the time of Red Knives. Has proved a moderate leader who has assisted the people loyal to the house. She is human, but as often in the New Houses her predecessor was a halfling.

Crimson

Xun Shao

Charming, socially popular halfling. Expert in alchemy and the arts of the dyer.

Yellow

Huang Shey

A halfling who was elderly when he was appointed after the time of Red Knives. Famously formal and has a very stiff manner, but respected for his consistency and eye for detail.

The Tithing Ceremony

When a Hemu large enough to produce their own silk joins with Lann City, there is a formal ceremony in which the silk produced since they last joined the city is presented, a certain portion gifted to the house and a certain portion dyed for free. Because of the comings and goings of different groups, this tends to happen relatively frequently and is often an excuse for a celebration - in recent years the fashion has been for formal balls to be held in the carriage-manor of the house concerned. After Hemu Honghei joins the city, there will probably be a tithing ceremony within a week or so, which will be a great opportunity to gain access to the manor.

Magic of the Lunzideren

There are two strands of magic in particular you have noticed and talked about in your time with the wagons:

Otherstores - in the richer wagons they have drawers and cupboards made from the reddish wood of the Distant Oak. The internal space of these furnishings is greater than the outer space.

Silk Command - there is a form of magic that involves commanding silk, either in the form of threads or fabric. This has various uses, many of them subtle. It is possible to create robes whose colours mimic the background of the steppe very effectively. They are less like true invisibility than strong camouflage, something like a chameleon.

#Background #Lore #Sincere apologies to any Mandarin speakers for making such a profound mess of your language #Crudely Drawn Swords #Silk War #Silk Houses #Rolling People

1 note · View note

viktorbezic · 6 years

Text

Lessons on Creativity from Rick Rubin

Rick Rubin is arguably one of the greatest producers of all time based on the number of hit albums produced. With a track record of not only popularizing new genres but also reviving artists and bands of the past by producing in a wide variety of genres. In my mind, the creative lessons learned not only transcend music genres but creative disciplines as well. His production credits are too numerous to list and span the gamut of metal to country and include: The Red Hot Chili Peppers, Jay-Z, AC/DC, Slayer, Neil Diamond, Johnny Cash, Tom Petty and Heartbreakers, Rage Against the Machine, Frank Ocean and the list goes on. I’ve made it a personal exercise to try and extract patterns or core principles that lead to his creative success from a doing a deep dive into his career through Jake Brown’s Rick Rubin in The Studio. The lessons learned are found below. They serve as reminders for me but hopefully are useful to others.

1. All aspects of your life fuel your creative output.

“My production style involves being in tune with everything. You can’t do it by listening to music. Pro-wrestling is really important. Movies. You know, everything. You have to make records the way that you live your life.” - Rick Rubin (1)

Your lifestyle contributes to your creativity. The rooms you sit in, the places you eat, the things you see, the media you consume, your routine and the people you talk to all have an influence on you and have the ability to spark something new. The act of creating is in large part a focused act. One of doing. But time away from work is critical as well. It creates the space for you to reflect and get a different perspective. You become the sum of influences. But sometimes you can’t do through sheer work alone. Sometimes you need time away from the work to make new connections. This is what Rubin is referring to when he says, “you can’t do it by listening to music.” In Wired to Create the author Scott Barry Kaufman describes how solitude leads to creative breakthroughs. As Kaufman states, science has confirmed that solitary reflection feeds the creative mind. Isolation is needed to reflect, make new connections and find meaning. Kaufman highlights some of the reclusive activities of filmmakers, writers, and philosophers seeking refuge in remote cabins to create from Swedish filmmaker Ingmar Bergman to philosopher Martin Heidegger (2).

Another factor Kaufman highlights that lead to creative breakthroughs is an openness to new experiences. Kaufman references studies that show a higher correlation between openness and total creative achievement over other traditional characteristics such as IQ and divergent thinking (3). Having a singular focus may make your work feel one dimensional. By using your whole life to help influence your work the higher chance of originality. Rarely are our interests singular, and it’s tough to place the various aspects of ourselves into silos. By embracing all of your influences, you’re able to channel a distinct point of view which shows up in your work.

2. If it’s a team effort, you have to like the people you work with.

The starting point for all of Rubin’s work is whether or not he has a healthy relationship with the artist. “I have to really like them as people first and foremost.” It can’t only be about the music. He really cares about what kind of people the artists are and what’s going on in their lives. He uses these inputs to evaluate whether or not they should collaborate (4). It sounds, but when tensions arise from pressure like a project deadline, poor team dynamics lead to the team's demise. The parallel here is also don’t work with assholes or be an asshole yourself.

Many creative partnerships start around mutually shared interests and a curiosity about the other collaborators. Someone’s project may hit you in the right way. You might reach out and ask how they produced the work and what their process is etc. I like the idea the conceptual artist and hacker Ryder Ripps puts it, "Those are the best kinds of friends to make, the ones that are around shared projects and interests” (5).

It’s hard to imagine any team that hates each other going the distance and doing great work. It happens on occasion. An example that comes to mind is A Tribe Called Quest. When they made the Love Movement they hated each other. And it’s arguably their worst album. It wasn’t a total write off, but it didn’t compare to the Low-End Theory and other records they had early on when they were more of a cohesive unit.

3. It’s not about what you can add, but you can take away.

With any creative project, the things that you don’t do are just as important as the things that you do. Rubin is a long time fan of AC/DC, he was drawn to them by their simple guitar riffs. It had a profound impact on how he thought about music. Rubin focused on simplicity with all of his artists and peeled away any unnecessary parts to get to the essence of an artist's music. As an example, when producing Electric for The Cult, he asked Billy Duffy to not use any effects on guitar solos. He’d tell Duffy “Play it clean, man; use a Les Paul, no effects.” (6). Bassist Jimmy Stewart also mentioned, “we stripped off all the surface clutter and got down to what we are really all about.” (7).

When Rubin helped the Red Hot Chili Peppers with Blood Sugar Sex Magic, Flea remarked, “On the majority of rock records you don’t hear a guitar or drums or bass. You hear a bunch of processed synthesized shit. That’s all because it’s a wall of sound…a recording studio creation. This record is very minimal, and it’s very live. When I hear it, I get a picture of a hand hitting a guitar, a string vibrating. This is four guys playing music. That took us a while to learn to do. There are so many options in the studio, you’ve got to know what you want. We were real careful not do anything unless it helped the song, which meant keeping that ‘band feel’ all the time."

My key takeaway, if something doesn’t feel right, trying to improve it with effects won’t work. Instead, we should be digging down deeper to find what better resonates with our tastes. By avoiding creating a wall of sound, the Red Hot Chili Peppers honed in on what really made a song great in their minds. It’s about peeling away the things that aren’t necessary. This can apply to any creative discipline. IE. Simplifying a design, editing down our writing, etc. As Antoine Saint Expury famously stated, “Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”

4. Don’t get stuck in a ‘genre.’

Rubin continually pushed himself to work with all different kinds of artists and music genres. From Rap and Heavy Metal to Country. His guiding principle was to operate on the fringes. He was into both Rap and Punk in the 80s because at the time they weren’t mainstream and there was a lot of room for experimentation and defining the sound (8). He started with hip-hop producing for both Run DMC and the Beastie Boys. Then he had success producing for The Cult which he followed up by producing for Slayer and Danzig. Creative differences with his Def Jam partner Russell Simmons forced him to create a new label. Instead of turning Def Jam into something it wasn’t. He decided to leave Def Jam and moved to the west coast to form Def American for all his other musical endeavors outside of hip-hop. Guiding principles for Rubin were vital, including a feel for music regardless of genre. It was about getting to the heart of an artist, and their music was about.

I’ve interpreted this as an example of being open and pursuing the things that feel right to you. If you feel like you’re not growing or stuck within a style, defined by you or not, it’s important to experiment outside of those boundaries. It’s effortless to do what you know and get complacent. Or take gigs to do X thing because you’ve done it fifty other times before. I’m not saying jump around and change your aesthetic or voice every week. You should definitely try to master a work style and hone in your voice in a focused way. Once it becomes routine, a change is required to maintain continued growth. A core philosophy or point of view that you can take with you across projects no matter how varied they may be. For Rubin, it was production by reduction and bringing mainstream sensibility and organization to music that’s on fringes or forgotten.

5. Produce a lot of work and mine for ‘hits.’

This is definitely not a new idea, but to produce good work, you need to create a lot of it. It’s rare that you get a hit from producing only a small handful of things. A volume of work is required to not only build up your skill set but to actually start finding things that work. It also gives you way more material to recombine and reshape. Ultimately, after long sprints of creativity, you need a period of time edit and curate. You can’t jump into editing from the onset as you might not have enough output to play with. You also might squash new ideas by editing too early.

Rubin’s approach is to get artists to write at least 30 songs to be able to have 10 that are album worthy. If a band only writes 10 songs the chances are only 2 are album worthy. He encourages songwriting because the artists are in fact writers, and writers write. It’s the homework that needs to be done before you get to the studio. You need to know you have great material before getting to the studio. The studio is for performing and not writing. When Rubin produced Californication for the Red Hot Chili Peppers, he had them write a ton of songs, around 30 to 40. Followed by heavy practice during the spring and summer, so they knew exactly what they needed to do when they got to the studio (9).

I’ve rarely come up with a great idea without writing down hundreds of ideas. On top of that, it gets you into a rhythm and flow versus editing too early. Editing too soon can easily result in writer's block.

6. Technical skill doesn’t always trump substance and taste.

The designer Ben Pieratt turned me on to a concept he adopted from the book cover designer Peter Mendelsund which he calls “special wrongness.” It’s the quality of something that’s slightly off that makes it memorable or gives it a unique character. He used it in the context of creating a name for a company, but I feel the concept works for any form of creative output. When we try to perfect something, smooth out its rough edges or refine it to death, we smooth away some of its original voice and character. Rubin doesn’t focus on the technical skills it takes to produce a track but searches for what he finds unique in song. It usually the unique quirks or what others would perceive as mistakes that are part of the artist’s individual expression (10).

Most of the studios Rubin works in were built in the 50’s or 60’s. He believes their sound is superior to a modern studio that is appropriately spec’d out and perfected. He describes these studios as follows, “before they were kind of magically, with smoke and mirrors, made to sound good by people with good ears. Now everything is computer generated. Now it’s perfect, but there’s no vibe at all…” (11). Bad vocals can be pitch corrected. You can argue that these corrections don’t make the work any better, depending on your definition of ‘better’. I guess the key whether or not there’s something worth correcting in the first place. Rubin goes on to state, “I do not know how to work a board. I don’t turn knobs. I have no technical ability whatsoever. But I’m there when [artists] need to me to be there. My primary asset is I know whether I like something or not. It always comes down to taste…I’m there for any key creative decisions” (12)

7. You don’t need to wait for special equipment to get it done. Embrace constraints.

When Rubin and the Beastie Boys produced their first album Licensed to Ill, they had no samplers and no digital technology. Chung King where they recorded was an analog studio. They would make tape loops. They would also have 3 or 4 people on a console who would be responsible for however many buttons they could press. There was no automation the songs were literally hand made. On the drumbeat in “Fight for Your Right,” Rubin and engineer Steve Ett would physically hit the rubber pads with their bare hands to emphasize the song’s kick and snare parts. Even though it took much more work to create a song it allowed for more freedom to alter a song on the fly (13).

There has to be a strong desire to create. With that, you’ll use anything that’s in front of you to pull something off. I’m reminded of a quote from photographer William Eggleston that illustrates the point, "The artist... If the thing is in that person to do, it will find a way out. Doesn't matter where you plant it.” Waiting to buy the latest tool, or to properly learn the software, may not help you produce better work. Or even help you produce more work. You may find another excuse altogether once you get the equipment you think you need. Start creating and experimenting with whatever you have in front of you. The only way you’ll learn to do something right is by spending a large amount of time doing it wrong. I’m using “right” in relative terms. As in what’s right for you. Constraints may also help the creative process along. I’ve written a series on creative breakthroughs based on constraints here.

8. Collaborate and Cross-pollinate

Rubin highly encouraged collaboration among all of his Def Jam artists to come up with breakthroughs and to push each other creatively. LL Cool J wrote songs for Run DMC. Run DMC shared songs with the Beastie Boys. An example is Slow and Low. The Beastie Boys took the track and modified the lyrics to reflect their interests. The idea to play the beat backwards on "Paul Revere" came from Run when the Bestie Boys were looking for a slower beat to rap over. Around this time Rubin had also signed Slayer to Def Jam. He walked down the hall and asked guitarist Kerry King of Slayer to play the lead on the Beastie Boys “No Sleep till Brooklyn” track. They shared the studio and didn’t know each other until the collaboration. It took a few minutes, but it became a signature part of the song (14).

Although Def Jam was a small label and didn’t have a massive roster of acts Rubin used what artist he did have in his studio to full capacity. They influenced each other, and he could take parts and pieces of their talents and strengths to make a song that he felt in his mind worked. My key takeaway is, yes it’s good to work alone to get things done. But periods of collaboration are needed to expand on initial thoughts and improve the final product. Diverse perspectives can lead to more unique outputs. Stephen Johnson, in Where Good Ideas Come From highlights London coffee houses during the Age of Enlightenment. It wasn’t the lone genius toiling by themselves but the interactions between creative people and free-floating conversations around different passions and interests. It allowed different networks of people to come that typically wouldn’t in the course of their day. And through their interactions would get new ideas (15).

9. Work with your idols

AC/DC is a band that Rubin admired for years to the point where AC/DC became his archetype for how to produce rock records. Very minimalistic sounds, peeling back all the layers to get to a raw sound. He worked directly with AC/DC after years of using their music as his benchmark for an excellent rock record. Their first collaboration began when he worked on one song with AC/DC for the Last Action Hero soundtrack. He would later produce 1995’s Ballbreaker Album with his idols. The key for Rubin was going back to their classic signature sound that was very stripped down (16).

In my mind, I think it was inevitable that Rubin would cross paths with his heroes after being committed to their music making approach and applying it to most of the bands he worked with for so long. He was so well versed in their material that when the opportunity came up, he was prepared to capitalize on it and brought them back to their original sound. It’s rare that we get to work with our heroes. But having a group of creative folks whose work you appreciate and follow may help guide some of your own work as there's some type of resonance between the work that they produce and the work that you create. Austin Kleon referred to this notion as identifying your creative lineage. Similar to a family lineage there’s a genealogy of folks who came before you that you have parts of. There’s also a genealogy of ideas. Although you can’t pick your family, you can indeed select who you allow to influence you based on the books you read, the music you listen to, etc. Similar to where we started in the article. Your creative lineage the sum total of life experience. What you let into your life becomes what influences you. You become the sum total of your influences. Although it’s rare to wind up working for your heroes at worst, you’ll end up finding a community that shares similar influences (17).

References

1. Rick Rubin: in the Studio, by Jake Brown, Accessible Publishing Systems, 2009. Page 1.

2. Kaufman, Scott Barry. Wired to Create. Penguin Publishing Group, 2015. Page 45.

3. Idem. Page 84.

4. Rick Rubin: in the Studio, by Jake Brown, Accessible Publishing Systems, 2009. Page 3.

5. Anderson, Chuck. “Life + Limb.” Ryder Ripps - Life + Limb // A Podcast about Creativity with Chuck Anderson, 10 Sept. 2014, www.lifeandlimb.com/episode/ryder-ripps.

6. Rick Rubin: in the Studio, by Jake Brown, Accessible Publishing Systems, 2009. Page 63.

7. Idem. Page 64.

8. Idem. Page 4.

9. Idem. Page 141.

10. Pieratt, Ben. “A 3-Step Process for Naming a Project/Product. (And Some Resources).” Ben Pieratt, Blog, 20 Feb. 2014, blog.pieratt.com/post/77293289254/a-3-step-process-for-naming-a-projectproduct.

11. Rick Rubin: in the Studio, by Jake Brown, Accessible Publishing Systems, 2009. Page 11.

12. Idem. Page 15.

13. Idem. Page 45.

14. Idem. Page 46.

15. Johnson, Steven. Where Good Ideas Come from: the Seven Patterns of Innovation. Penguin, 2010.

16. Rick Rubin: in the Studio, by Jake Brown, Accessible Publishing Systems, 2009. Page 120.

17. Kleon, Austin. Steal like an Artist: 10 Things Nobody Told You about Being Creative. Workman, 2012.

#my writing #long reads #creativity #creative process #music production #Rick Rubin

2 notes · View notes

talabib · 3 years

Text

How To Become Super-Efficient.

We all wish we had more time to spend on the things we love doing, whether that means being around our family or working on our hobbies. Yet, despite these wishes, time is something of which we never seem to have enough.

Let’s show you how you can find time in your schedule and space in your brain to spend most of your time doing what you want to do. Based on three central aims – Optimize, Automate and Outsource – they inform you how to unleash waves of efficiency in everything you do, from organizing your finances to maintaining your health.

Track your life to learn where you can start saving time.

Maybe you’ve heard of the 80-20 rule? It states that 80 percent of what you accomplish is the result of a mere 20 percent of all the time and energy you invest. And this isn’t only applicable to work or study. It’s the case for everything you do. So how can we figure out what time isn’t worth spending?

One way is to start tracking. But who’s got time to live their busy schedule and observe it? Luckily, there are resources out there to make tracking your time much easier.

Enter RescueTime, a program that monitors what you’re actually doing on your computer all day. If you find that a particular website or application is stealing your day away, RescueTime will help you block access to it. Problem solved!

But what if it’s not just your productivity you want to track, but your health? Take it back to basics with an old-school paper journal to record everything you eat during the day. You could also get your hands on a pedometer to count all the steps you take, or simply make an effort to weigh yourself each day. Because the more you know about your day, the sooner you’ll be able to improve it.

But what does it mean to improve something as broad as our daily routine? Think of it as optimizing your processes. For a role model, look to IKEA. Each IKEA product comes with highly optimized instruction manuals for assembling each product, whether it’s a coffee table or geometric lamp.

These instructions have been boiled down to their very essence – a few language-independent, easy-to-follow steps. It’s time to approach your life like IKEA approaches their manuals. Whatever the task, whether it’s writing emails or organizing meetings, you should minimize fuss and get it done in as few steps as possible.

Create an external brain to save valuable space in your own.

We all like to think of ourselves as great multi-taskers with brilliant memories. But often we don’t actually have enough room to juggle everything in our minds. Life would be so much simpler if we just had an extra brain. Well, guess what? You can have one!

Several new tools have emerged to help us remember all those dates and details. Evernote, for example, is an app for taking notes of all kinds: textual or pictorial, hand-drawn or web-based. It’s also free and has no storage limit.

You can consider Evernote simply as a backup of your brain. Neuroscientists have even shown that Evernote organizes information in a very similar way to the human brain, linking similar thoughts together into complex, interconnected networks.

But what if you know how to organize but want to spend less time organizing? Say hello to your very own virtual assistant. Today, you can hire a person or several people and delegate tasks to them online. Additionally, there are two kinds of virtual assistants: on demand and dedicated.

An on-demand assistant service consists of a pool of assistants. Say you’ve got a task that needs doing, like proofreading a document or improving a PowerPoint presentation. Whoever’s available in the pool will do it. For $25 a month, Fancy Hands allows you to get assistance with as many as five tasks. For $95, you can request assistance with an unlimited amount of tasks per month.

Dedicated assistants, on the other hand, will do all your tasks personally. This means there’s a closer relationship; they’ll get to know you and eventually take on more difficult tasks. For $197 a month, Zirtual gives you a dedicated assistant for ten hours every month.

Customize to save time – and money!

Say you’ve got a great idea for the perfect bedroom shelving unit to suit your needs. You know you’ll have to build it yourself, which means buying the materials, borrowing tools and spending hours preparing and cleaning up. But if only there were an easier and less expensive way! Well, there is: 3D printing.

3D printing offers a world of possibilities for creating your own customized products. Take Shapeways, a site where you simply upload a 3D model, and they print it for you.

Jeff, for example, wanted to create a custom bracket to mount his new MacMini to the wall. He made a simple sketch of his idea and used the online outsourcing platform Fiverr to find someone who could make a complete 3D model of it. He then sent this model to Shapeways and, a week later, the completed bracket was waiting for him in his mailbox.

If that sounds like a success to you, then get this: Jeff then used the Shapeways ecommerce platform to sell his MacMini bracket, and made $400 by selling six of them.

Customization won’t just save and earn you money, however. It will also give you more free time.

Consider Vitamins on Demand, a service that collects all the medications and supplements you require and then organizes them into separate packs for each day. Say goodbye to loading up your holiday suitcase with all your pill bottles while worrying whether you’ve got them all. Instead, just grab the number of packs you need and head out the door!

Want another example? Think about the arduous task of finding a suit that fits. If you want to cut that time in half, sign up to Indochino. This company produces tailored suits and will guide you through your measuring process, ensuring you’ve got measurements you can use again and again for a suit that fits just right.

Take control of your workweek.

When Tim Ferriss published The 4-Hour Workweek, there was obviously some exaggeration involved – you simply can’t get a book written if you only work four hours each week! Nevertheless, the book made an important point: you need to make your workweek yours, and decide what to do, and when.

So what’s the first step? Begin by determining which hours of the day are your best working hours. This will automatically make you more effective. Some people prefer working in the night; others, in the morning. Some like working a bit every day, while others like to squeeze a lot into shorter periods of time.

Everybody works differently, so figure out what works best for you! It’s also vital to figure out what is slowing you down. Often it’s external factors – a supplier that’s always late, or those indecisive clients.

The solution? Make the window for interaction with your clients smaller. This won’t only make your own day more effective, but force your clients to be more efficient, too. They can thank you for it later!

And there’s also another part of your workday that’s sapping your time: the scheduling of meetings. Did you know that, on average, the normal procedure for organizing a meeting requires an exchange of seven emails? Luckily, applications such as ScheduleOnce will, as the name suggests, help you get that meeting scheduled the first time around.

The app allows you to make your calendar public, so that you and your colleagues can find meeting times that work for all involved parties.

Errands add up, so eliminate them!

If you had a clear conception of how much time you spend running errands each month, you’d be shocked. But come on, a dash to the corner store for toilet paper or dish soap? No big deal, right? Well, the fact is, these errands add up. If you want more productivity, you’ve got to kill those errands!

But how to get started? One great way is by signing up for an online delivery service. Amazon’s Subscribe & Save, for instance, delivers necessities like toilet paper, razors, shampoo and laundry detergent to your door at certain intervals.

Perhaps you go through two tubes of toothpaste every month; so arrange to have those two tubes delivered to you at the end of each month and never waste time buying toothpaste again.

Though toilet paper is an obvious necessity, there are plenty of other important items that you can have delivered. For instance, by arranging via Subscribe & Save for an order of nine-volt batteries to arrive every six months, Jane ensures that her smoke detectors always work.

There are some errands that you can’t automate, however. You know, those ones that catch you by surprise, forcing you to rush out and do them before it’s too late. Well, thanks to outsourcing, you don’t have to waste time on these, either.

TaskRabbit is a great example of an online outsourcing marketplace for those small, unforeseeable tasks – a quick run for groceries, for instance, or a sprint to get your computer or car fixed.

Here’s how the Tony put this service to use:

His nephew, who lives in Los Angeles, wanted a slide for his second birthday. Tony, who lives in New York, used TaskRabbit to contract a person in Los Angeles to purchase the slide at an IKEA in Long Beach, take it to his nephew’s parents’ house and assemble it. A truly unforgettable gift – all for $47.

Stay on top of your finances with the latest tools.

So far, we’ve learned about the value of tracking things like your time and dietary habits. However, it’s not always beneficial to spend loads of time tracking everything. Trying to track your finances, for example, often results in strain and stress.

Keeping tabs on what and where you spend is a challenge, especially when you have several bank accounts and credit cards, not to mention things like loans, mortgages and stocks and bonds.

So why not take advantage of some new tools and cut the time spent agonizing over your budget?

Mint.com is a great tool for organizing your finances and keeping track of your financial health.

Just provide Mint.com with your details and logins for bank accounts, loans and credit cards, and they’ll let you know via email when a balance is dipping toward the red, or if there’s been a big deposit or withdrawal from an account, as well as making sure that you’re getting paid.

Mint.com can also provide a categorized and comprehensive overview of your financing that allows you to see how you spend your money and time. Mint.com can even use your previous spending patterns to suggest budgets for you!

Another innovative new tool to help you stop stressing and start saving is BillShrink. BillShrink simply asks for a few personal details: your checking account information, your driving habits, how often you use your cellphone and how much you spend on other services, such as movie streaming and magazine subscriptions.

Based on this information, Billshrink outlines cost-effective alternatives and outlines how much these alternatives would help you save over a two-year period; they also alert you to new deals and offers.

But don’t be shocked if you find you could be saving more than you realized: For example when I used BillShrink for the first time, I realized I could save around $14,000 in two years!

Give yourself limits and boost your quality of life.

We’ve all been there: a desk seething with piles of paper; a floor only traversable via a narrow path through a chaos of stuff. And surrounded by all that stuff, you can never find exactly what you need when you need it.

But there’s no need for this headache! You can overcome it simply by setting limits for yourself. Start off by setting an upper limit. This will help you locate and keep track of your possessions.

For example, Take Tony’s electronic gear stash, which once occupied an entire closet. Over time, though, the closet became overcrowded, and finding a specific cable meant dragging the whole mess out of the closet and onto the floor. He realized things had gotten out of hand, and decided to take action.

So he bid his electronics goodbye and sold off most of his gear on Ebay. What was left fit into one box, which became the upper limit. If he buys a new piece of electronic gear, some other piece has got to go. This way, his stash is manageable, tidy and he can always find what he needs.

Just as you can use upper limits to control things that you might be overindulging in (like perusing Facebook, perhaps), you can also make sure you’re doing more of the things that lift your quality of life, such as exercising, meditating and traveling.

How? By setting lower limits. Ari, for example, has set a lower limit of at least one trip every month, at least 30 miles of running per week and cooking meals at home at least three days a week. By setting lower limits for your leisure time in this way, you’ll make sure your time doesn’t always get gobbled up by work.

Batch your tasks to stay focused.

Have you ever had the frustrating experience of just getting into something – and then being interrupted by a distracting text or email? It ruins your focus and now you’re irritated to boot.

Well, there’s a way to keep your focus from being destroyed like this: batching.

Batching is the simple process of grouping similar tasks together and completing them in batches, instead of one at a time, here and there. This way, it’s easier to focus on what you’re doing right now.

Some people use batching by deciding that they’ll only answer emails during the first 10 minutes of every hour, instead of replying as they arrive.

Of course, when you start batching, you learn exactly how much time certain things take up. Take note when things seem to be taking longer than they should, as this tells you that you might need to optimize.

A great place to start is by getting rid of unnecessary paperwork. Sure, there’s a lot of talk about living in a paper-free society, but everyday we still find ourselves dealing with pesky papers. Which is why online tools are around: to help us eliminate paperwork even further.

If you ever have to send a document via snail mail, Postal Methods can help you out. All you have to do is upload your document. The company prints it for you, puts it in a stamped envelope and then sends it on its way in the mailbox. This saves you a lot of time, and who likes licking stamps, anyway?

Health is the ultimate productivity secret.

It’s as simple as this: getting enough shut-eye and eating healthy determines how much energy you will have to do the things you want to do. No amount of productivity apps in the world can change this!

When you deprive yourself of sleep, your body starts producing a rather unpleasantly named hormone called ghrelin. Ghrelin increases hunger and lowers levels of another hormone, leptin, which regulates metabolism. When our metabolism doesn’t function properly, we will inevitably get tired.

If you want to improve your sleep, there are two simple steps that will help. Firstly, take D-vitamins with your breakfast each day. Secondly, avoid devices emitting blue light, such as TVs, iPads and computers in the hour before you go to bed.

Starting to live more healthily is also simple. Just eliminate fats, right? Wrong. A lot of people still see fat as the enemy, but sugar is the real villain here. Our brains can’t function without fat, whereas too much sugar prevents us from absorbing vitamins A, D, E and K. So, no more wasting your time on processed foods and sweets! Start seeking out natural options and increasing your intake of the “good” fats found in olive oil and avocados.

Once you’ve made sure you’re sleeping enough and eating well, it’s time to start thinking about getting your body moving. Claiming that you’re too stressed to exercise is simply no excuse! The truth is that exercise reduces stress, and you’ll find that a good fitness program will allow you to cope better and better each day.

Design your own exercise regimen to include three types of movement.

First, there should be a strength and skill component – something like rock climbing or parkour will do the trick.

Second, include high-intensity interval training – a short interval of exerting yourself to the maximum, followed by an interval of active rest.

And, finally, you should engage in some kind of mobility training – something like yoga or just a good old-fashioned stretching session.

Though life today seems to be stress-filled, there are ways to cut through the clutter and own your hours. With simple techniques and innovative new tools and services to guide you, you’ll be saving time for the things you love in no time at all.

Action: De-clutter your inbox! Use your e-mail service’s filter to automatically put all e-mails that have the term “Unsubscribe” and don’t have “FW” or “RE” in them in a folder called Optional. This will weed out a lot of non-essential and distracting e-mails from your inbox that you can look at later once you’ve got time.

#How To Become Super-Efficient.

0 notes

chaotictyranttragedy-blog1 · 3 years

Text

Problem Gambling Statistics Nz

Problem Gambling Statistics Nz Coronavirus

Problem Gambling Statistics College Students

Problem Gambling Statistics Nz Deaths

New Zealand); and settlement and social inclusion/support. The study adopted an ecological approach to exploring the impacts of gambling and problem gambling on the health and wellbeing of Asian families and communities within New Zealand and utilised an acculturation framework to assist with the.

Problem gambling is not just about losing money. Gambling problems can affect a person’s whole life. Gambling is a problem when it: gets in the way of work, school or other activities harms the person’s mental or physical health hurts the person financially damages the person’s reputation causes problems with family or friends.

World gambling statistics show that around 26% of the population gamble. That means around 1.6 billion people worldwide gamble and 4.2 billion gamble at least once every year.

PROBLEM GAMBLING RATES HAVE PLATEAUED The New Zealand 2012 National Gambling Study found that the number of people who regularly participate in continuous forms of gambling (like gaming machines) decreased from 18% in 1991 to 6% in 20128.

On this Page:

Problem gambling levy Problem gambling services are funded through a levy on gambling operators. The levy is collected from the profits of New Zealand’s four main forms of gambling: gaming machines in pubs and clubs; casinos; the New Zealand Racing Board and the New Zealand Lotteries Commission.

Phillida Bunkle1 Director of Strategic Relations Health Creation Ltd, UK

John Lepper Economic Advisor Department of Culture Media and Sport, UK

Abstract

A public health approach to gambling policy depends upon careful socio-economic analysis to guide resource allocation to education, information provision and treatment. This paper argues that existing research does not provide the required factual basis for such an approach, yielding conclusions that are either inconclusive or inconsistent in crucial areas, because it tends to be aimed at exploring pathology not social processes. We conclude that a better research agenda must be based on studies that explore gambling in its social and economic context.

Introduction

The Gambling Act, which was passed into law in September 2003, was a direct output of the Gaming Review. The Act is intended to incorporate a 'public health approach' to gambling policy (Korn and Shaffer 1999, Ministry of Health 2002). Such a policy approach depends, however, upon careful socio-economic analysis to guide the allocation of resources to education, information provision or treatment. Without a firm factual basis, the public health approach is a warmed-over version of the status quo.

As a step towards developing such an approach this paper questions whether existing research provides the required factual basis. We find that it does not and in fact yields conclusions that are either inconclusive or inconsistent in crucial areas. The main reason for this shortcoming is that existing research is aimed at exploring pathology not social processes. Moreover, even on its own terms, it is seriously flawed.

We conclude that a different research agenda must be followed if the public health approach to gambling policy is to improve policy outcomes. That agenda must be based on studies that explore gambling in its social and economic context.

The Public Health Approach

Although the Gambling Act 2003 does not define 'public health approach', the approach has been the subject of considerable discussion amongst practitioners and policy makers for some time (Bunkle 2000). It is based on the realisation that unless treatment regimes take account of the social dynamics of gambling, they are unlikely to be successful. Worse, pathology-based treatment providers are likely to actively deny the existence of wider social and economic problems as they compete for scarce resources with other investigators. This may lead to the harmful socio-economic effects of gambling being ignored or untreated.

The public health approach focuses on populations, not individuals, and seeks to base response on socio-economic factors and to encompass mental health issues. It is so named because it seeks to place gambling in a framework that is safe for individuals and not disruptive to society at large. A public health approach to gambling is one that accounts for, and addresses, the costs and benefits of gambling accruing to both individuals and communities. It aims to develop strategies that minimise the negative impacts of gambling while nurturing any possible benefits.

A public health approach to gambling policy, therefore, seeks to promote healthy and responsible gambling behaviours among all members of society and does not aim to single out those addicted to gambling. Healthy gambling involves making informed choices and can enhance the wellbeing of gamblers and the community. The public health approach is characterised by being holistic, widely available, based on socio-economic research, controlled by the community and provided through community-based institutions (Bunkle and Lepper, 2002). Therefore, for-profit casinos (both virtual and physical) and unlimited access to pokies are inconsistent with a public health approach to gambling.

The Nature of Gambling

Information

There are three main sources of information on gambling in New Zealand. First, there are administrative collections in which data are collected in processes ancillary to taxing, licensing or treatment. Second, there are data produced through prevalence surveys or surveys of attitudes towards, or participation in, gambling. Third, there are data arising out of general statistical systems, which include input-output studies conducted for Casino Control Authority hearings.

The most developed sources lie in the first and second categories. Here the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) has been particularly active having commissioned two large prevalence studies and regular attitudinal surveys. It has also published data from treatment providers, numbers of gambling machines and gambling expenditures. However, so far there is little data available on the flows of funds through, employment in, or value added, created by the gambling industry -- let alone any social impacts that may be associated with it.

It is usually assumed that for most people gambling is a benign activity, but for a small minority it has every appearance of mental illness (Abbott and Volberg 1991, 1999, Easton 2002). This pathological perspective means that many of the wider issues surrounding gambling are missing from view. It also means that the data collected are not necessarily consistent with social reality. These points are illustrated by interrogating the available data to see if they can yield reliable information about the nature of gambling.2

How Much Gambling?

Official figures show a very rapid rise in the supply of gambling products, including casinos, unlimited-stake gambling machines in casinos and a rapid increase in non-casino machines with a stake limit of $2.50 per play, lottery products, scratchies and sports betting, particularly since 1990. In the space of 10 years after 1993, six casinos opened serving a population of just over four million. In December 2003 there were more than 22,000 non-casino gambling machines,3 roughly one for every 180 women, men and children in the country. The increased numbers and heavy concentration of gambling opportunities make New Zealand a useful laboratory for understanding the dynamics of gambling participation.

Loss, which we define as net expenditure on stakes, minus prizes paid, is the most socially relevant figure. Official figures show that New Zealanders lost $1.87 billion gambling over the 2002/03 financial year,4 equivalent to 1% to 1.3% of GDP. This makes gambling a very significant factor in the economy. However, Statistics New Zealand estimates neither value added by the gambling industry, nor employment in it. Moreover, there are no official measures of the flows of funds through the gambling industry, effects on regional economies, or non-financial impacts.

Official data identify the Territorial Local Authorities in which machines are located, but not where and in what social context those machines are individually sited.5 The Mayor of Manukau City commissioned a detailed examination of where the machines in his city are operated. It shows a clear concentration of machines in areas of low socio-economic status and relative deprivation.6 This research was repeated for all New Zealand by Wheeler who found, on the basis of 2003 machine data and 2001 Census data, that 53% of machines were to be found in the most deprived 30% of communities (Wheeler 2003).

Who Gambles?

According to Abbott and Volberg (2000), the proportion of adults who are regular gamblers decreased from 48% in 1991 (Abbott and Volberg 1991)7 to only about 40.8% in 1999 (Abbott and Volberg 2000:97).8

This result is generally confirmed by Amey (2001).9 Amey found that in 2000 the overall rate of weekly gambling was lower than in 1995 in all gambling modes except casinos where a marginal increase was recorded and in gaming machines where there was no change (2001:19 Table 2.5).

Gender Ratio

Abbott and Volberg's studies show major changes in the gender composition of gamblers. By re-analysing their data it can be shown that in 1991 they found approximately10 699,100 men and 349,550 women who were regular gamblers (i.e. those who gamble at least weekly). In 1999 they found only 566,153 men, but 538,875 women gambled in some form at least weekly (Abbott and Volberg 2000:97 Table 9a). Thus, between 1991 and 1999 the number of regular women gamblers rose at an average rate of 5.1% a year, while the number for men fell on average by 2.2% per annum.11 In other words, in 1991, roughly 1.86 men to every women gambled regularly, but in 1999 it was 1.05 men to every woman. The figures show that the gender patterns had converged to the point where women's activity was almost the same as men's in 1999.

In Amey's data, presented in Table 1, which are based on participation in the past year, there is evidence of a large reduction in participation by men. However, Amey found that, Lotto apart, the rate of participation by women also decreased. Compared with 1990, more women but fewer men participated in playing Lotto in 2000. Participation by men and women in all other forms of gambling that were in existence in 1990 showed a decrease. Nevertheless, in the previous five years there was a marked increase in participation in casinos. Table 1 Participation in Gambling, by Gender, New Zealand 1990, 1995 and 2000

WomenMen199019952000199019952000Source: Amey 2001Lotto777980798270Table 3.11 p. 43Kenon.a.127n.a.105Table 3.20 p. 55Instant Kiwi666253655343Table 3.30 p. 68Telebingon.a.n.a.23n.a.n.a.16Table 3.39 p. 79Sportsn.a.n.a.5n.a.n.a.12Table 3.62 p. 113Pokies241918333018Table 3.71 p. 127Track212115252518Table 3.55 p. 102Casinosn.a.515n.a.616Table 3.83 p. 142Housie995232Table 3.47 p. 90

At the start of the 1990s gambling was largely a male preserve but by the end of the decade women had almost caught up. All data show that, compared with the early 1990s, fewer men (both proportionately and absolutely) are gambling. However, it is not clear whether the changes in the gender ratios are due to greater participation by women or because the rate of participation by women has fallen more slowly than that of men.12 Even less clear are the socio-economic factors behind this change.

Who Doesn't Gamble?

Abbot and Volberg showed that overall during the 1990s, the numbers of men and women who did not gamble rose. In 1991, 11% of all adults either had never gambled or did not bet in the last six months (Abbott and Volberg 2000:101). By 1999, this figure had risen to 13.8% (see Table 2). Amey also reports an overall rise in the proportion of non-gamblers from 10% to 13% (2001:12 Table 2.2). Table 2 Those Who Never and Regularly Gamble, by Gender New Zealand 1991 and 1999

19911999WomenMenTotalWomenMenTotalNever*159,50080,850240,350201,031172,079373,110Regular**362,850674,3001,037,150538,875566,1531,105,028

* Includes those who have not bet in the past 6 months. ** Those making bets at least once a week.

The question of whether or not abstinence from gambling is increasing or decreasing, as with all discussions of trends over time, depends upon the starting point chosen for the assessment. Amey (2001:12 Table 2.2) reports that between 1985 and 2000 the proportion of non-gamblers fell from 15% to 13%. Hence, overall, on average there is a slight, long-term tendency for the rate of non-gambling to fall. Nevertheless this overall figure masks marked variations over time and between genders.

Between 1985 and 2000, male non-gamblers rose from 13% to 15% of respondents while women non-gamblers fell from 17% to 11% (Amey 2001:12 Table 2.2). Over that time, non-gambling men fell from 13% in 1985 to 8% in 1990, stayed constant in 1995 and rose to 15% in 2000. The proportion of non-gambling women fell from 17% in 1985 to 11% in 1990 and stayed constant thereafter. Nevertheless, Abbott and Volberg found in 1999 that fewer men (13.1%) than women (14.4%) were non-gamblers (2000:95 Table 9a), which is the reverse of Amey's findings.13

Why Do People Gamble?

Through the 1990s, the reasons given for engaging in gambling remained relatively unchanged. More than half of all gamblers consistently state that they gamble in order to win money. In this regard New Zealand is similar to Victoria, Australia (see Table 3).

Table 3 Reasons for Gambling, by Gender, New Zealand and Australia 1991 and 1999

New ZealandAustralia% of gamblers responding (allows multiple responses)1991a1999b1999cTotalWomenMenTotalTotalWin Money5752555359Entertainment/Fun3036383719Support Worthy Causes/Charity1930252827Socialising1514171538 Excitement/Challenge/Beating Odds1512131322Habit/Hobby7444n.a.Others7666n.a.Curiosity2333n.a.Belief in Luckn.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.12Don't Know2n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

a Source: Abbott and Volberg (1991:54 Table 13). b Source: Abbott and Volberg (2000:125 Table 16a). . c Source: Productivity Commission (1999 Vol 1 (C):5.5 Table 5.1).

Gambling is a negative-sum game for punters. Most people lose, but a very few win in a big way. Such apparently widespread and consistent irrationality is beginning to attract attention from a variety of social scientists in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Indeed, the entire area of motivation of gamblers in New Zealand deserves careful study.

Which Communities Gamble?

Gambling machines are equal opportunity providers. Participation does not depend on language skills, gender, ethnicity, attractiveness, or physical or intellectual capacity. The equal chance of being a 'winner' is central to the appeal of the machines and is emphasised in the way they are marketed. The interrelation of culture and ethnicity may well be critical in comprehending the social impacts of gambling participation. Anecdotal experience suggests that there has been particularly rapid change in participation of Maori, Pacific and Asian women and men.

If all problem gamblers are equally likely to seek help from treatment providers, then we would expect to see the demographic make-up of problem gamblers reflected in the demography of those seeking help. In fact this is not so. Treatment providers have found a rapid and sustained rise in women callers so that in 2002 49.2% of new callers were women. Treatment providers have also established services specific to Asian communities based on perceived need. However, the available quantitative measures only partially reflect this perception. Abbott and Volberg found in 1999 no current Asian pathological gamblers although they did find relatively high rates of pathological gambling among Māori and Pacific people and relatively low rates among Europeans.14

These differences may be because those of different ethnicities gambling regularly may not become problem gamblers at the same rate and problem gamblers belonging to different communities may not seek help from treatment providers to the same extent.15 All sources agree that Māori and Pacific people are vulnerable. Nevertheless, a striking inconsistency exists between the negligible level of problem gambling in the Asian community found by Abbott and Volberg and the experience of treatment providers particularly in Auckland. The place that gambling takes in the communities of New Zealand depends upon a wide variety of factors that have yet to be fully explored. Some of these factors have been canvassed by Abbott and Volberg and others but they must remain conjectural until fully investigated by socio-economic studies.

Gender and Problem Gambling

Abbott and Volberg calculated that in 1999 there were 80,108 lifetime problem and pathological gamblers in New Zealand (2000:149 Table 20). This is 3% of the adult population. At the same time it was estimated that 2,629,522 had never had problems (see Table 4). Abbott and Volberg found that throughout the 1990s men consistently suffered from problem gambling at double the rate of women, but that by the end of the 1990s the ratio of men to women among pathological gamblers was much closer to one-to-one (Abbott and Volberg 2000, Paton-Simpson et al. 2001:43).16

Table 4 Gambling Problems, by Gender, New Zealand 1991 and 1999

19911999WomenMenWomenMenNo Problem96.090.098.195.9Problem*3.06.01.12.8Pathological**1.04.00.91.2

* Those interviewed scoring 3 or 4 on the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS). ** Those interviewed scoring 5 or more on the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS).

Between 1998 and 2000 treatment services were confronted by 2,880 pathological gamblers (Department of Internal Affairs 2000:42, Paton-Simpson et al. 2001:43). This would represent 9.8% of the total current pathological gamblers estimated by Abbott and Volberg to be in existence in New Zealand in 1999 (Abbott and Volberg 2000:136 Table 18, Paton-Simpson et al. 2001:43).

In 2000 treatment providers assessed 1,274 new cases using a South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) scale. Only 1.7% of these were found not to be problem or pathological gamblers. Of those 758 were men and 516 were women. The Australian Productivity Commission argued that there was a rising proportion of women among problem gamblers (Productivity Commission 1999 Vol. 3 (Appendices):Q9-Q12). It called it the 'increased feminisation of problem gambling' (p.Q12).

A very different source of information, recently made available, suggests that the apparent increase in women's problem gambling may be related to an increase in participation in gambling. The Time Use Survey taken in 1999 found that on average New Zealand adults spent 60 minutes a day gambling.17 On average, women gambled for 76 minutes a day and men gambled for 44 minutes a day. For women, this was slightly longer than they spend preparing food (Statistics New Zealand 1999).

Are Problems Increasing?

Abbott and Volberg found in 1999 that the prevalence of problem gambling was lower in 1999 than in 1990 (2000:182 Table 40). If these results are to be believed there was a significant fall in the prevalence of gambling problems and pathology amongst men and gambling problems among women during the 1990s. There was, however, no significant change in the prevalence of pathological gambling among women.

These figures mean that in 1991 between 125,000 and 174,000 men and women suffered from lifetime problem and pathological gambling (Abbott and Volberg 1991:29), but in 1999 only between 58,000 and 107,700 similarly suffered (Abbott and Volberg 2000:138 Table 18). In other words, in each year between 1991 and 1999 there was an average reduction of 8,330 cases of problem and pathological gambling.

The reported reduction in problem gambling is underlined by a separate longitudinal study conducted by Abbott and Volberg. Of a sample of 217 selected in 1991 for intensive interview, 54% were found to be either problem or pathological gamblers.18 But only 30% out of the 143 remaining in the sample in 1998 were similarly categorised in 1998 (Abbott, Williams and Volberg 1999:61-64 Tables 7-10). Further analysis revealed that, in 1991, 27% (39 of the common sample of 143) of those intensively interviewed were classified as pathological gamblers (Abbott and Volberg 1992:33 Table 11) whereas only 13% (18 of 143 gamblers) were classified as pathological in 1998 (Abbott , Williams and Volberg 1999:61-64 Tables 7-10).19

These results have encouraged the view that those with gambling problems 'mature out' of their condition. For example, Abbott, Williams and Volberg emphasise:

These findings suggest that there was a considerable reduction in the prevalence of gambling problems over time within the total sample… The reductions in lifetime and current probable pathological and problem gambling 'cases' and mean scores are highly significant. (1999:53)

However, Abbott, Williams and Volberg also stress that the above data must be interpreted with care.20 The original sample of 217 was not randomly selected to represent the population at large in 1991.21 Moreover, the sample used in 1998 displays a marked rate of attrition compared with 1991, despite repeated attempts to keep the sample intact (p.44). Although Abbott, Williams and Volberg argue on the basis of demographics that the follow-up sample is representative of the original group, we consider that the 1998 sample may no longer be representative of the level of problem gambling within the original 1991 sample, let alone the whole population in 1998. Finally, the view is also seriously questioned by the fact that people approaching treatment services for the first time rose from 2,923 in 1997, to 5,632 in 2000 (Paton-Simpson et al. 2001:8), a growth rate of 24.4% per annum.

Depending on which data one accepts, either the prevalence of problem gambling is declining or it is increasing very rapidly. The apparent discrepancy may be explained in a number of ways. Abbott, Williams and Volberg suggest that those suffering gambling problems may change over time with a minority developing more serious problems, while in a majority of cases problems cease altogether (1999:56). Alternatively, it may simply reflect the difference between the rapidly increasing incidence of pathological gambling (indicated by presentation data) at a time when the overall prevalence of problem gambling (measured by prevalence surveys) is static or falling.22 We take a different view, which is that the results are seriously affected by the under-representation in the sample of members of those communities most at risk (see the section 'Methodological Limitations of Prevalence Studies' below).

What Forms of Gambling Cause Problems?

In both 1991 and 1999, Abbott and Volberg explored the favourite form of gambling engaged in by problem gamblers.23 They found that in both years track gambling was the most popular single form of gambling among problem gamblers (1991:53 Table 12, 2000:167 Table 33). However, if casino and non-casino pokies are combined their importance rose in the 1990s until pokies in general became the most important form of gambling among problem gamblers in 1999 (see Table 5). This tendency seems to have intensified in recent years (Paton-Simpson et al. 2003).

Table 5 Gambling Modes of Problem Gamblers, New Zealand 1991, 1999 and 2002

% of problem gamblers1991a1999b1999c2002dNon-Casino Pokies12.021.360.578.1Track31.325.814.85.5Casino Pokiesn.a.11.814.710.4Casino Tablesn.a.7.76.73.8Other or Multiple or None29.54.71.50.9Sportsn.a.n.a.1.10.7Housien.a.5.30.40.2Lotto/Keno/Scratchies26.619.10.30.4

a Abbott and Volberg 1991:53 Table 12. b Abbott and Volberg 2000:167 Table 33. The percentages do not sum to 100 in the original table. c Department of Internal Affairs 2000:82. d Paton-Simpson et al. 2003:13.

The survey results are partially at odds with the experience of treatment providers. The latter find that non-casino pokies are by far the most popular form of gambling among problem gamblers24 and that track betting is relatively unimportant. This discrepancy may reflect a near doubling in the numbers of, and more than doubling of expenditure on, poker machines since Abbott, Williams and Volberg's survey was taken.25 In this respect, the latest data from the providers may be more in tune with the experience in other countries than are the findings of Abbott and his colleagues.26

Who Spends on Gambling?

Gambling expenditure is defined as stakes paid less prizes received. Assessing expenditure on gambling through surveys is notoriously difficult (some of the gaps in existing information are described in Abbott 2001b:11). In the United Kingdom, for example, it was found that respondents to pilot surveys were so confused that different definitions of expenditure had to be used for different types of gambling when the national prevalence survey was finally taken (Sprotson et al. 2000:33). This was because in the case of lotteries, for example, people did not take account of prizes and so overstated expenditure while in the case of gambling machines, track racing or table games people generally did account for winnings. Moreover, it may be in the nature of their condition that problem gamblers erroneously estimate their expenditure on gambling.27 Finally, we might entertain the testable hypothesis that women and men gamblers differ in the accuracy of their expenditure estimates.

Our retro-analysis of Abbott and Volberg's figures suggests that between 1991 and 1999 average spending rose from $37 per month per adult to $41.42 per month. Men spent less in 1999 than in 1991 although women spent more. Both at the beginning and end of the period men spent more each month than women but by 1999 the gap between them had narrowed substantially (see Table 6).

Table 6 Average Monthly Spending on Gambling, by Gender, New Zealand 1991 and 1999

1991*1999**WomenMenAverageWomenMenAverage$20$55$37$30.44$52.88$41.42

*Abbott and Volberg 1991:27. **Abbott and Volberg 2000:111-114 Table 14a.

We must, however, hold these estimates in considerable doubt. The 1991 data imply that total spending on gambling in 1991 was $970 million compared with a Department of Internal Affairs estimate of $575 million.28 In 1999, spending of $1,346.8 million is implied, which compares with a Department of Internal Affairs estimate of $1,167 million (see Table 7). There appear to be two explanations for this discrepancy. On the one hand, expenditure on Lotto fell as a proportion of total gambling expenditure between 1991 and 1999, hence the tendency for expenditure on Lotto to be overstated also fell.29 On the other hand it could also arise because women are more accurate than men about their spending and more women were engaged in gambling in 1999 than in 1991.30

Table 7 Total Annual Spending, by Problem and Non-Problem Gamblers, New Zealand 1991 and 1999

1991*1999**$ million% of total$ million% of totalProblem Gamblers198.920.8282.821.7Non-Problem Gamblers756.079.21,017.578.3Total Spending954.91,300.3

*Abbott and Volberg 1991:52 Table 11. **Abbott and Volberg 2000:165 Table 32.

Depending on which data one accepts, men spend far more heavily on gambling than women (or they lie more extravagantly about their spending than women) or men and women spend very similar amounts.

Abbott and Volberg (2000:166) report that those with a history of gambling problems (only about 3% of the adult population) account for 24% of expenditure on gambling. In 1999, the Productivity Commission found that Australian problem gamblers contributed 33% of all gambling expenditure (1999(c):7.41). It also reported that a similar pattern existed in some states of the United States. Lepper (1999) found a similar result in the case of the proposed Riverside Casino in Hamilton.

In 1999, Abbott and Volberg (2000:165) estimated that current problem gamblers lost an average of $526.28 per month.31 These reported losses are substantially below those found by treatment providers.32 For example, in 1999, in the four weeks prior to their approach for treatment, men lost an average of $2,849 and women $1,542 (Department of Internal Affairs 2000:94). A year later the gap between men and women was virtually non-existent ($2,703 for men and $2,619 for women) (Paton-Simpson et al. 2001:48). Given women's much lower average income, such expenditure by women is more significant in its impact than that by men.

Between 1991 and 1999, it was found that regular gamblers contributed an increasing proportion of total spending (see Table 8). There was a large increase in the dependence of the industry on regular gambling during the 1990s, especially in its continuous forms. All data confirm that a large proportion of gambling revenues are drawn from the small number of customers who have gambling problems. Indeed, one source suggests that if gambling problems no longer existed, then many gambling modes would not be financially viable.

Table 8 Total Annual Spending, by Regularity of Gambling, New Zealand 1991 and 1999

1991a1999b$ million% of total$ million% of totalRegular Non-Continuous164.317.2415.031.9Regular Continuous137.814.4520.140.0Non-Regularc652.868.4c365.228.1Totalsd954.9d1,300.3

a Abbott and Volberg 1991:50 Table 10, 1991:52 Table 11. b Abbott and Volberg 2000:108 Table 13. c Found as residual. d From Table 7.

Theoretical and Policy Limitations of Prevalence Studies

The American Psychiatric Association classifies pathological gambling as an impulse-control disorder. The screens used to identify the presence of this disorder (principally SOGS and DSM-IV ) are an integral part of prevalence studies. Hence, the investigation of prevalence presumes problem gambling is a matter of individual pathology. (For a helpful discussion of some of the theories of gambling pathology see National Research Council 1999:31ff.) Unfortunately, the pathological model is theoretically flawed and is an unsatisfactory guide to public policy.

The pathological approach to problem gambling assumes that gambling problems lie 'in' the characteristics of individuals that make them abnormal demanders of gambling services. Apart from problem gamblers, the 'normal' relationships of demand and supply, or risk and reward, are assumed to be applicable. Any problems do not, therefore, lie 'in' the nature, accessibility or quantity of the supply (Easton 2002).

Prevalence studies seek to find problem gamblers on the basis of mental health data. They lead to a limited approach to the management of gambling; namely, identify the small minority of gamblers who are problem gamblers and distribute an appropriate treatment service to them. Having done that, the industry can be allowed to operate as just another part of the entertainment market subject to the conditions that customers of gambling firms are well informed or at least not actively misled and that unscrupulous business practices are rare. It should be noted that this approach policy is shared with the United Kingdom (Gambling Review Body 2001, Department of Culture, Media and Sport 2002).

Unfortunately, the pathology theory may be contrary to the known facts. In 1998, Abbott, Williams and Volberg (1999:57) found that only 28% of those classified as having lifetime problems in 1991 were similarly classified when re-screened in 1998. Such a result is not theoretically possible.34 Either the first or the second application of the screen resulted in inaccurate results. If the first was inaccurate and the second accurate, Abbott , Williams and Volberg argue, this result casts doubt upon the use of such screens over long time intervals (1999:58).

However, if the second screen is inaccurate and the first is accurate or if both are inaccurate, then a much more serious problem has to be faced. Such a result indicates that problem gambling and pathology have different underlying causes and that any relationship between them is a matter of chance rather than cause. In other words, it is inappropriate to describe pathological gambling as a mental disorder and, hence, neither its prevalence nor its incidence can be accurately measured by means of psychological screens such as SOGS or DSM-IV.

Moreover, the mental health theory does not answer a fundamental question: How is it that so many individuals acting independently have so quickly encountered problems playing the pokies in many countries? Is it sufficient to argue that every such individual has a predilection for an impulse-control disorder that can be triggered by a number of social and individual stimuli? We cannot explore such questions here. Nevertheless, we comment that such explanations ignore key factors such as the political and market power of gambling suppliers and the apparently addictive nature of the activity. In the end, social-psychological explanations merely serve, at best, to push the problem back one more step to the social and economic causes of these forces. On the face of it, therefore, there appear to be deep, powerful and widespread social forces at play, which have yet to be explored.

Most crucially, for all its sophistication, prevalence analysis is of very little assistance in designing policy. It cannot tell us which people are likely to become problem gamblers or in what numbers. Hence, it is of little use in planning treatment services. For this purpose incidence data is considerably more help than prevalence surveys. They at least show how many had problems in the recent past and in what form.

To our knowledge, the incidence of problem gambling has only been investigated in one study, by Cunningham-Williams et al. (1998:1093-1096). However, even these data do not assist us to predict future incidence in the population as a whole because they do not indicate who is currently excluded from treatment. Moreover, they do not assist us to design programmes that might reduce harm in the future. For that, we must employ a socio-economic approach to the problem.

Methodological Limitations of Prevalence Studies

In this section, by way of illustration, we will focus on studies conducted by Abbott and Volberg and colleagues. These studies were chosen for this examination because they employ some of the most scrupulous procedures and sophisticated statistical methods of analysis of any comparable studies. Consequently any methodological limitations of their work are also likely to be found in other, less carefully conducted and analysed studies. (It should be emphasised that many of these points are also noted and discussed by Abbott and Volberg et al. themselves in these various reports.) Moreover, these studies have been particularly influential in the formation of gambling policy.

Sample Self-Selection

The sample employed by Abbott and Volberg (2000) in their 1999 national prevalence study was very large, but to a significant degree self-selected. The sample was partially drawn by making appointments for telephone interviews one week in advance. Such a technique runs the risk of attracting the lonely into the sample. It also may allow those with problems to which they are not prepared to admit to absent themselves from the study. This element of self-selection by the interviewees explains why the sample has an over-representation of middle-aged Pakeha women and under-representation of young men, Maori, Pacific peoples and Asians. These latter groups are the very ones that treatment figures suggest are now most at risk.

The study attempted to overcome the problem of an unrepresentative sample by weighting the survey data prior to the statistical analysis. The result was not satisfactory. One remarkable outcome was that, in 1999, Abbott and Volberg's sample did not include a single Asian person who was currently a problem gambler. In the case of Asian gamblers, therefore, it matters not at all how the sample is weighted because any number multiplied by zero is still zero.

It would have been preferable to use the technique of over-sampling to construct a more representative sample as they did in 1991, when Maori were over-sampled. In 1999, Abbott and Volberg did not over-sample minority populations, but chose to rely on adjusting the sample, using weights derived from the 1996 Population Census (2000).

Sample Deterioration

Abbott, Williams and Volberg (1999) made an ingenious attempt to construct a longitudinal study by re-interviewing, in 1998, the sample used in Abbott and Volberg (1991), which had consisted of intensive interviews of 217 subjects and was not intended to be representative of the population as whole.

By 1998, it was possible to find only 143 subjects of the original sample. Such a degree of sample deterioration makes comparison between the years highly dubious. Yet the influential 'maturing out' conclusion is based on this dubious comparison. The study is an interesting and suggestive study of the 143 concerned but its results cannot be interpreted beyond that. It certainly cannot be taken as applicable to all gamblers nor even to all gamblers with problems. The missing 73 subjects may well have been those with continuing problems.

Telephone Interviewing

Data for the Abbott and Volberg prevalence studies were collected through telephone interviews. 35 The interviews consisted of administering a psychological screen for problem gambling together with enquiries about demographics, employment and income.

The psychological screen was designed to be used by psychologists in face-to-face situations in order to assess patients for possible gambling problems. One of the assessments that psychologists would make when administering the screen is the degree to which the patient is telling the truth. This assessment is based on the psychologist's judgements based on body language and questions designed to check consistency - difficult to do during telephone interviews.

Finally, interview data about incomes and expenditure are notoriously unreliable unless pay-slips and receipts verify them (Blascynski 1997:237-252). Many, even non-pathological, gamblers count their winnings and ignore or minimise their losses. This is particularly true of problem gamblers in denial. Some indication of the scale of this unreliability can be gained by comparing the total expenditure on gambling calculated by Abbott and Volberg with official estimates.

Use of SOGS

Abbott and Volberg, together with all other prevalence researchers, define the existence or otherwise of problem gambling in terms of responses to one or other of the standard gambling screens. Accordingly, those scoring 3 or 4 on SOGS are defined as problem gamblers and those scoring 5 or more are regarded as pathological. (Abbott and Volberg 2000 compare the results obtained using SOGS with measures obtained by using DSM-IV.) Such screens have been changed for use with young people and have to be regularly updated as behaviour changes over time. (Abbott, Williams and Volberg (1999:58) speculate whether or not the lifetime SOGS screen is not actually measuring current problem and pathological gambling. In other words, it may be measuring incidence rather than prevalence.)

It has been suggested by Rossen (2001:8) that screens (including SOGS) used to define problem gambling are biased against finding women problem gamblers because the pathology of problem gambling has been based on male stereotypes. It may be that we have yet to find the most appropriate methods of identifying women problem gamblers. If so, the degree of problem gambling by women may have been systematically underestimated in the prevalence studies so far conducted.

For example, the problems that women face as a result of gambling may be more tied to financial difficulties and social isolation compared with men. The only problems that are counted are those identified using the SOGS test which are entirely psychological. Social problems which may result from gambling, and from which a gambler may have suffered, are not included (Department of Internal Affairs 1995) and cannot be inferred. Hence, it may be more appropriate to enquire whether or not a person had left children in a risky situation (i.e. in the street, in a locked car or home alone) while gambling than if they were going though a suicidal state of mind.

Another Research Agenda

The lacunae and inconsistencies in available data detailed above are hardly surprising given the perspective of the studies involved. Prevalence surveys generate the hypotheses they test from the standpoint of individual pathology. The focus of such studies is bound to be on unusual and abnormal mental states rather than widespread social and economic processes. As a consequence, despite the long standing efforts of the Department of Internal Affairs,36 the most basic elements of the social and economic basis of gambling are not adequately explored by such investigations. This should not be taken to mean that the studies discussed above have nothing to say about the social and economic context of gambling. Indeed, the studies, especially those involving face-to-face interviews, contain a welter of interesting hypotheses about this very matter. Unfortunately, in many cases, it is difficult to relate these suggestive results to a well-founded view about the relationship between social and economic factors and the extent and distribution of various gambling behaviours in the wider community.

The drag on local and regional social and economic development of gambling has yet to be properly analysed. Yet without a clear idea of the socio-economic role of gambling the public health approach to gambling policy must remain empty rhetoric.

Increased problem gambling means less saving and less spending on other items whether luxuries or necessities. The results among this market segment might be hunger, loss of housing, bankruptcy and even suicide (Grinols and Mustard 2001:143-162). It may mean that the needs of children and other dependants are ignored. The effects on the wider community may include increased defalcations, theft and other criminal activities aimed at financing gambling habits (Gazel 1998:66-84). In New Zealand we have far to go in exploring the potentially corrosive mix of social and economic forces that swirls around problem gambling.

Perhaps from an economic standpoint the most serious result is the erosion of the ability to save and hence to build new capital and enterprise within the local community. (This includes the building of social, human and cultural capital within social networks.) Jobs provided at a far-off casino or overseas pokies factories are no substitute for those that might otherwise be created locally. The stress that lack of economic prospects brings is also often a harbinger of other health problems and the lack of studies on the impact of gambling on local community enterprise is a serious gap, especially in view of the Government's policy interest in this area.

The fact that in most societies it is the women's networks that are crucial to local wealth and job creation means that increased gambling by women has a particularly negative effect on future employment. Most activity for women is not market activity (Statistics New Zealand and Ministry of Women's Affairs 2001). In New Zealand, in 1998-99, both men and women spent an average of seven hours a day in all forms of work. However, 70% of women's work was unpaid and 60% of men's was paid. Women's work is largely concerned with the maintenance of relationships and networks, and in caring for and socialising the young, the ill and the old. The real impact on such invisible work is of critical significance for sustainable economic development. (From analysis of the time use survey data it is estimated that unpaid work is the equivalent of 2 million full time equivalents (FTEs) compared to a total paid labour force of around 1.7 million FTEs (Statistics New Zealand and Ministry of Women's Affairs 2001: 17).

For example, the symptoms of women's problem gambling may be more social than individual. In most societies, it is women rather than men that are the cement that ensures that society hangs together, especially during crises (see, for example, Silvey and Elmhirst 2003:865-879). Much of this work is unpaid and largely goes unmeasured. It provides the means by which people survive under stress and create life chances for themselves (Dominguez and Watkins 2003:111-135). Hence, the time spent gambling that is not devoted to the nurturing of social networks may be more damaging to society as a whole than the money diverted from other needs. The importance of this issue is seen in the finding for the Time Use Survey that women were spending more time gambling than preparing food, and deserves further investigation.

Gambling may be a symptom, rather than the cause, of a breakdown of the very possibility of collective action through social networks. In other words, it may be that the individualisation of society has gone so far as to destroy the networks on which future social and economic development normally depends. Perhaps we need to investigate the public health consequences of the curtailment of individual life chances that has resulted from the economic policies of the past 20 years.

It may be, therefore, that the incidence of problem gambling is triggered by social and economic deprivation. If so, it may be possible to predict the need for treatment services from socio-economic indicators. Anecdotal support for this view comes from the reports of increased gambling, even in Moslem countries, in the aftermath of the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s (Dursin 2001).

Conclusion

The public health approach to gambling policy must be based on a thorough knowledge of the causes and consequences of gambling. Unfortunately that knowledge does not yet appear to exist in New Zealand. It follows that a substantial proportion of the Problem Gambling Levy, which was introduced in the Gambling Act, should be devoted to socio-economic research into gambling.

The research agenda that should be followed is different from that employed until now. It should ask detailed questions about the social and economic foundations of gambling activities. It should also aim to predict the needs of problem gamblers and to design and propagate effective education about safe gambling behaviours.

It is important that (in addition to the work of the Department of Internal Affairs) Government takes a broader interest in this agenda, and investigates the health, gender, development and other effects of the spread of gambling, and develops a more realistic model on which to base New Zealand's gambling policy.

References

Abbott, Max (2001a) 'Problem gamblers and non-problem gamblers in New Zealand: A report on Phase Two of the 1999 Prevalence Survey' Report 6, New Zealand Gambling Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

Abbott, Max (2001b) 'What do we know about gambling and problem gambling in New Zealand?' Report 7, New Zealand Gaming Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June

Abbott, Max and B.G. McKenna (2000) 'Gambling and problem gambling among recently sentenced women prisoners' Report 4, New Zealand Gambling Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

Abbott, Max, B.G. McKenna and L. Giles (2000) 'Gambling and problem gambling among recently sentenced males in four New Zealand prisons' Report 5, New Zealand Gambling Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

Abbott, Max, and Rachel Volberg (1991) 'Gambling and problem gambling in New Zealand: A report on phase one of the national survey' Department of Internal Affairs, Research Series No. 12, Wellington, December.

Abbott, Max, and Rachel Volberg (1992) 'Frequent gamblers and problem gamblers in New Zealand: Report of phase two of the national survey' Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June.

Abbott, Max, and Rachel Volberg (1999) 'Gambling and problem gambling in New Zealand: An international overview and critique, Report 1, New Zealand Gaming Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, December.

Abbott, Max, and Rachel Volberg in association with Statistics New Zealand (2000) 'Taking the pulse on gambling and problem gambling in New Zealand: A report on phase one of the 1999 National Prevalence Survey' Report 3, New Zealand Gaming Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June.

Abbott, Max, Maynard Williams and Rachel Volberg (1999) 'Seven years on: A follow-up study of frequent and problem gamblers living in the community' Report 2, New Zealand Gaming Survey, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, December.

Amey, Ben (2001) 'People's participation in and attitudes to gaming 1985-2000: Final results of the 2000 survey' Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, June.

Australian Institute for Gambling Research (1998) 'Study of the social and economic impacts of New Zealand casinos' Final Report, Australian Institute for Gambling Research, Campbelltown, NSW.

Blascynski, A., V. Dumbao and M. Lange (1997) 'How much do you spend gambling?' Ambiguities in survey questionnaire items' Journal of Gambling Studies, 13(3):237-252.

Bunkle, Phillida (2000) 'Making a safer bet for consumers' address to First International Gambling Impact Conference, Adelaide, 14th April.

Bunkle, Phillida, and John Lepper (2002) 'Women's participation in gambling: Whose reality? A public health issue' presented to 5th European Conference on Gambling Studies and Policy Issues, 2-5 October.

Costello, Tim, and Roy Millar (2000) Wanna Bet? Winners and Losers in Gambling's Luck Myth, Allen and Unwin, St Leonard's, NSW.

Cunningham-Williams, Renee, Linda B. Cottler, Wilson M. Compton III and Edward L. Spitznagel (1998) 'Taking chances: Problem gamblers and mental health disorders -- Results from St. Louis Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study' American Journal of Public Health, 88(7):1093-1096.

Curtis, Bruce (ed.) (2002) Gambling in New Zealand, Dunmore Press, Palmerston North.

Department of Culture, Media and Sport (2002) 'A safe bet for success --modernising Britain's gambling laws: The Government's response to the Gambling Review Report' HMSO, London, CM 5377, March.

Department of Internal Affairs (1995) 'The social impact of gaming in New Zealand' Policy Research Unit, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, November.

Department of Internal Affairs (2000) 'Problem gambling counselling in New Zealand 1997-1999: A New Zealand Gaming Survey Supplementary Report' Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington, August.

Dominguez, Silvia, and Celeste Watkins (2003) 'Creating networks for survival and mobility: Social capital among African-American and Latin-American low-income mothers' Social Problems, 50(1):111-135.

Dursin, Richel (2001) 'Indonesia: In Hard Times, People Bet on Gambling' Inter Press Service, 22 February, www.oneworld.org/ips2/feb01/06_15_008.html.

Easton, Brian: 'Gambling in New Zealand: An Economic Overview', Bruce Curtis (ed.) Gambling in New Zealand, Dunmore Press, Palmerston North.

Gazel, Ricardo (1998) 'Economic impacts of casino gambling' Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Scien ce, 556(March):66-84.

Gambling Review Body (2001) 'Gambling Review Report', HMSO, London, CM 5206, July.

Grinols, Earl L., and David B. Mustard (2001) 'Business profitability versus social profitability: Evaluating industries with externalities, the case of casinos' Managerial and Decision Economics, 22:143-162.

Kiata, Lis (2002) 'Looking for Lady Luck: Women's gambling in New Zealand' in Bruce Curtis (ed.) Gambling in New Zealand, Dunmore Press, Palmerston North.

Korn, David A., and Howard J. Shaffer: 'Gambling and the Health of the Public: Adopting a Public Health Perspective', Journal of Gambling Studies, Vol. 15, No. 4, Winter 1999.

Lepper, John (1999) 'Economic assessment of Riverside Casino: Further brief of evidence to Casino Control Authority' Integrated Economic Services Ltd., Wellington, 8 March.

Ministry of Health (2002), 'A Draft National Plan for Minimising Gambling Harm', Ministry of Health, Wellington, October.

National Research Council (1999) Pathological gambling: A critical review, National Academy Press, Washington.

Paton-Simpson, G.R., M.A. Gruys and J.B. Hannifin (2001) 'Problem gambling counselling in New Zealand: 2000 national statistics' Problem Gambling Purchasing Agency, Palmerston North, April.

Paton-Simpson, G.R., M.A. Gruys and J.B. Hannifin (2003) 'Problem gambling counselling in New Zealand: 2002 national gambling statistics' Problem Gambling Purchasing Agency, Palmerston North, April.

Productivity Commission (1999) 'Australia's Gambling Industries' Report 10, AusInfo, Canberra.

Rossen, Fiona (2001) 'Youth gambling: A critical review of the public health literature' Centre for Gambling Studies, University of Auckland, Auckland.

Silvey, Rachel, and Rebecca Elmhirst (2003) 'Engendering social capital: Women workers and rural-urban networks in Indonesia's Crisis', World Development, 31(5):865-879.

Sprotson, Kerry, Bob Ehrens and Jim Orford (2000) 'Gambling behaviour in Britain: Results of the British Gambling Prevalence Survey' National Centre for Social Research, London, June.

Statistics New Zealand (1999) 'Time use statistics', Table 20, www.statistics.govt.nz, tusCtablesxls.

Statistics New Zealand and Ministry of Women's Affairs (2001) 'Around the clock: Findings from the New Zealand Time Use Survey 1998-99' Statistics New Zealand, Wellington, May.

Wheeler, Ben (2003) 'Problem gambling geography of New Zealand' Public Health Intelligence Applications Laboratory, School of Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, October.

Footnotes

1 Acknowledgements The original version of this paper was written while the authors were Visiting Professors in the Centre for Gender Studies, College of Foreign Languages, Dalian University, China. The authors wish to thank the many colleagues and friends with whom they have discussed these issues over the years and two anonymous referees who made helpful suggestions. Any errors of fact, logic or judgement that remain are the responsibility of the authors alone. (Currently, John Lepper provides advice on gambling issues to the British Government. Health Creation Ltd, where Phillida Bunkle is now Director of Strategic Relations, is developing a Cancer Lifeline Kit and the Health Creation Programme.)

2 We concentrate on those studies that deal with gambling in New Zealand as a whole. For this task, we examined a number of sources in addition to those cited. These included a number of economic and social impact reports produced at Casino Control Authority hearings and the many studies and reports on gambling published by the Department of Internal Affairs. Those that had no direct bearing on the following argument are not cited here. However, we can direct the interested reader to Abbott and Volberg’s literature review (1999).

3 Department of Internal Affairs publishes data on gambling machine numbers. Non-casino gaming machine numbers were as follows: June 2003, 25,221; 23rd September 2003, 23,083, December 2003, 22,734.

4 Department of Internal Affairs estimates.

5 The Department of Internal Affairs only publishes data on the location of gambling machines in authorised premises by Territorial Local Authority as reported to it by machine operators.

6 Submission by Sir Barry Curtis, Mayor of Manukau City, to Government Administration Select Committee, April 2002.

7 Abbott and Volberg report that total spending on gambling was $970 million and the average per capita spend was $37 per month. This means that the adult population was 2,184,685 (1991:25).

8 In 1999, the population of New Zealand over 18 years of age was 2,709,630 (see Table 9a in Abbott and Volberg 2000:97).

9 Exact comparison between Abbott and Volberg and Amey is not possible because they use different definitions of “adult population”. Abbott and Volberg define adult as anyone 18 years or over while the other two surveys used 15 years as the cut-off.

10 Because the results of the 1991 survey are not presented in a manner to allow reporting of exact levels and numbers, except indirectly by inference, all such data derived from it have been rounded to the nearest 50.

11 It should be noted that these are average rates of increase. It may be that the pattern over time was far more irregular than these calculations imply. Unfortunately, we do not have any evidence to elucidate this issue.

12 It is possible that the reduction measured by Abbott and Volberg (2000) reflects a substantial fall in the frequency of play by men in a particularly popular form of gambling. Amey (2001:44) appears to indicate this may have happened in the case of Lotto after 1995. We are grateful for an anonymous referee for pointing this out.

13 It is possible, given the differences in sample size between the two studies, the differences in the populations sampled, the fact that Abbott and Volberg asked about gambling in the previous six months while Amey used a 12-month period, and the different methodologies employed, that this discrepancy is not statistically significant.

14 A key difference between Abbott and Volberg’s 1991 survey and that of 1998 was that in 1991 the Maori population was over-sampled.

15 We are grateful to an anonymous referee for this point.

16 In discussing the issue of how best to compare prevalence rates over time is a subject, Abbott and Volberg (2000:138-139) come to the conclusion that lifetime prevalence measures “partly reflect current gambling problems” and that lifetime prevalence rates are a conservative measure of lifetime gambling problems. Hence, it appears that lifetime measures understate lifetime prevalence but actually track current problems.

17 Primary and secondary time use combined.

18 Using the so-called lifetime (South Oaks Gambling Screen) SOGS-R screen. Problem gamblers are those answering positively to three or four questions and pathological gamblers are those answering five or more questions in the positive.

19 Of the 143 in the common sample in 1991 and 1998, 27% were classes [Typo: “classed”] as probable pathological and 27% as problem gamblers in 1991. By 1998, these percentages had fallen to 13% and 17% respectively.

20 The authors state: “… strictly speaking, inferences in a statistical sense as to how 1991 frequent and problem gamblers for New Zealand as a whole are behaving in 1998 also require caution in interpretation” (Abbott et al. 1999:45).

21 For example, the original sample drawn in 1991 was limited to those living in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch who were selected to elucidate in depth, rather than represent, four sub-groups of gamblers; namely, frequent non-continuous, frequent continuous, problem and pathological gamblers.

22 Incidence is the flow of new occurrences of a phenomenon while prevalence is the stock of existing occurrences. Unless incidence data are adjusted for occurrences that subsequently cease, the two ways of looking at phenomena will coincide only by chance. For an interesting discussion of this distinction and how it should be measured see Abbott, Williams and Volberg (1999:58).

Problem Gambling Statistics Nz Coronavirus

23 “Problem gamblers” means possible problem and possible pathological gamblers combined.

24 Those presenting to treatment providers may not be representative of problems gamblers in general because they tend to be those with the greatest (i.e. most pathological) conditions.

25 Total non-casino gambling machines rose from 13,812 in June 1999 to 25,221 in June 2003. Expenditure on non-casino gambling machines rose from $360 million in the year ended June 1999 to $777 million in the year ended June 2002 [Update: $941 million in the year ended 30 June 2003].

26 Productivity Commission (1999: Vol 3: Q9-Q12) and personal communication with Paul Berringer, CEO of GAMCARE, who indicated a rapid increase in presentations resulting from Internet-related problems.

27 The DSM-IV screen specifies “lies to family members, therapist, or others to conceal the extent of involvement with gambling” as one of the criteria of a problem gambler. This raises the intriguing theoretical possibility that the greater the probability of a person being a pathological gambler the less truth they will reveal about their situation. Such a theoretical possibility implies that the statistical analysis of gambling screens can only be interpreted within the limits imposed by an appropriately cast “uncertainty principle”.

Problem Gambling Statistics College Students

28 [I have re-drafted this footnote to accurately reflect what the Department does. The core point the authors make is valid.] The Department of Internal Affairs estimates annual spending on gambling machines and casino gambling indirectly. It has precise figures for the Lotteries Commission and precise figures for almost all race betting and sports betting. It estimates figures for gambling machines and casinos from a combination of annual reports, self-reported information and publicly-reported taxation information. From these, it estimates net loss and, by applying an average loss factor, gross turnover. Such estimates will prove highly inaccurate if there is systematic underpayment of tax or losses are significantly different from the average.

29 We are grateful for an anonymous referee for this point.

30 In any case, the 1999 survey over-sampled women.

31 Care should be taken in using this figure since it has a relative sampling error of more than 50%.

32 This discrepancy may not be surprising if rapidly rising losses over a short time are a common trigger for help-seeking behaviour.

33 For most forms of gambling (casinos are an exception) in New Zealand a further condition is that the proceeds from it are used to encourage community activities. In practice this means, for example, that he profits from pub pokies are frequently used to support rugby teams.

34 We are grateful to an anonymous referee for pointing this out.

35 Four of the seven studies published as part of the 1999 New Zealand Gaming Survey involved face-to-face interviews. However, Abbott and Volberg decided against using such techniques for the national prevalence survey because it would limit the sample that was possible to achieve with the available financial resources and because the 1999 survey would not be comparable with the 1991 prevalence study. Although the various face-to-face studies have been consulted and do yield many informative and suggestive hypotheses about the socio-economics of gambling, they do not directly bear upon the main argument of this paper, which is about general social and economic trends. The face-to-face studies are Abbott, Williams and Volberg 1999, Abbott and McKenna 2000, Abbott, McKenna and Giles 2000 and Abbott 2001a.

36 Compared with many jurisdictions the record of the Department of Internal Affairs in promoting research into gambling in New Zealand is good. It has sponsored a series of quinquennial surveys on participation in, and attitudes towards, gambling, commissioned two prevalence surveys and published a regular flow of monographs and data on various aspects of gambling.

Gambling can be a harmless entertainment activity from which people derive personal enjoyment and which provides other positive social effects. The proceeds from non-commercial gambling provide significant funding for a wide variety of community purposes. If well directed, these funds can enhance empowerment, participation and the quality of life across all types of communities. However, gambling also has adverse effects on many individuals, their families and their communities. From time to time, the prevalence and impacts of problem gambling in New Zealand are the subject of misinformed comment. In the interests of informed discussion, the Department, in consultation with the Ministry of Health, has compiled some key facts based on current research and other data.

Problem Gambling in New Zealand - A Brief Summary (PDF, 95K)*

Return to the Problem Gambling page *You need Adobe Reader installed on your computer to view our files. If you are unable to open the files we recommend you get the latest version of Adobe Reader. You can download and install Acrobat Reader for free from the Adobe website.

Problem Gambling Statistics Nz Deaths

0 notes