Jusrede
For those of you that are wondering what the title of my blog means, it was supposed to be a joke. I thought it would be funny to name my blog like the way Musiq Soulchild spells. (his name is just "Musiq" now). His CD's have been titled "aijuswanaseing" and "juslisen." get it now?
Not that he's my favorite artist out there or anything, but aijusthautitwhuzphunea. His songs aren't bad actually. If i can recommend from his first album "Mary-Go-Round," "Girl Next Door," and "Love," in addition to his current single "Half-Crazy" off the second album.
As for my blog title, I will probably change it eventually. I'm still messing with the template too, and maybe I will add some links sometime as well.
Monday, June 17, 2002
Guys are from Jackass, Girls are from Dawson's
In an attempt to get more in touch with my sensitive side, I've been giving some extra thought to the differences between guys and girls. Now, I'm pretty sure that I already know about the physiological differences, so I won't write about that. But I'm still learning a lot about how girls are compared to guys in terms of how they think and act, especially in relationships.
It took quite a keen eye to note that girls are, in general, more thoughtful than guys. Yes, that is why you read my blogs, to learn such earthshattering information. Anyways, we all knew that much already, but there's still a lot I'm observing.
For example, guys never call each other "just to talk." Speaking from a personal point of view, my typical phone conversation lasts under a minute and involves only the basics: what you wanna do, when you wanna meet, and where. We (guys) don't curl up with the phone on our beds and giggle about which girls are "cute" or who's going out with who. Not that we never talk about that stuff, but it's rarely done over the phone. The same goes with email. The only long phone conversations I have (5 mins and over) are with those of the female variety. Not that it's terrible or anything, but girls have to understand that guys aren't used to that kind of thing. We aren't trying to be rude or insensitive when there's a long pause because there isn't anything to talk about, and we say "Ok, well i guess I'll talk to you later then."
Another thing is what guys value in relationships. We don't typically care about getting gifts and remembering special dates, but it's important to know that your bro's got your back when it counts. We don't have to have breakthrough moments of crying our eyes out telling each other about all our past breakups and childhood drama to be good buds with someone, all it takes is half an hour of playing video games or basketball with someone and feeling like you identify with each other. It's also okay to not see your best friends all the time. If one of my friends goes on vacation or something, I never feel dissed if they don't call me regularly or email me to keep in touch, cause they'll be back soon anyways.
Girls, on the other hand, are real sticklers when it comes to those little things. You better not forget a girl's birthday, Mother's Day, an anniversary of any type, or Martin Luther King Jr. Day, because they sure won't. It's hard for guys to understand that stuff like flowers, cards, or a simple unexpected phone call mean so much to a girl, considering that we don't need (or even want) any of that ourselves. Girls can't be best friends with someone they met 3 days ago - it takes years, or at least one of those breakthrough moments I described above.
There's tons of other differences. Guys can just hang around, chill with each other and do nothing, while seeing nothing wrong with that. Girls have to be doing something when they're together, whether it's shopping, painting their toenails, talking about guys, going out and dancing, whatever... but they look at guys and call them bums and losers for doing nothing. In reality, we aren't doing "nothing" per se, that's just called "chillin" and it's one of the ways we bond. Guys (typically) don't pay as much attention to the lyrics in songs or who sings it, while girls are more sensitive about that. Guys are good drivers, girl's aren't. Guys are more easily entertained by shows like MTV's Jackass, while girls need intricate storylines in stuff like Dawson's Creek. Guys are bigger than girls. Girls are better cooks (not trying to belittle that, but I personally believe that girls are better at paying attention to detail and that makes them better at cooking). Guys are more emotionally stable, girls are emotional rollercoasters - they reach higher highs but lower lows. (A word of advice for guys getting into new relationships: find out as soon as you can when "that time of the month" is and brace yourselves accordingly.) Guys "think the idea of punting a small dog is funny" (quotes because I got that one from one of those email forwards once).
Now, I'm not ripping on either guys or girls here. Not even all of this stuff I'm saying is true because there are plenty of exceptions, and don't be insulted if you're a guy who likes to cook or follows Dawson's Creek. But if you haven't already, think about the things I just wrote and tell me if I'm off base here.
By the way, it's been a slow past few days work-wise, and that is why I have been writing such long entries.
In an attempt to get more in touch with my sensitive side, I've been giving some extra thought to the differences between guys and girls. Now, I'm pretty sure that I already know about the physiological differences, so I won't write about that. But I'm still learning a lot about how girls are compared to guys in terms of how they think and act, especially in relationships.
It took quite a keen eye to note that girls are, in general, more thoughtful than guys. Yes, that is why you read my blogs, to learn such earthshattering information. Anyways, we all knew that much already, but there's still a lot I'm observing.
For example, guys never call each other "just to talk." Speaking from a personal point of view, my typical phone conversation lasts under a minute and involves only the basics: what you wanna do, when you wanna meet, and where. We (guys) don't curl up with the phone on our beds and giggle about which girls are "cute" or who's going out with who. Not that we never talk about that stuff, but it's rarely done over the phone. The same goes with email. The only long phone conversations I have (5 mins and over) are with those of the female variety. Not that it's terrible or anything, but girls have to understand that guys aren't used to that kind of thing. We aren't trying to be rude or insensitive when there's a long pause because there isn't anything to talk about, and we say "Ok, well i guess I'll talk to you later then."
Another thing is what guys value in relationships. We don't typically care about getting gifts and remembering special dates, but it's important to know that your bro's got your back when it counts. We don't have to have breakthrough moments of crying our eyes out telling each other about all our past breakups and childhood drama to be good buds with someone, all it takes is half an hour of playing video games or basketball with someone and feeling like you identify with each other. It's also okay to not see your best friends all the time. If one of my friends goes on vacation or something, I never feel dissed if they don't call me regularly or email me to keep in touch, cause they'll be back soon anyways.
Girls, on the other hand, are real sticklers when it comes to those little things. You better not forget a girl's birthday, Mother's Day, an anniversary of any type, or Martin Luther King Jr. Day, because they sure won't. It's hard for guys to understand that stuff like flowers, cards, or a simple unexpected phone call mean so much to a girl, considering that we don't need (or even want) any of that ourselves. Girls can't be best friends with someone they met 3 days ago - it takes years, or at least one of those breakthrough moments I described above.
There's tons of other differences. Guys can just hang around, chill with each other and do nothing, while seeing nothing wrong with that. Girls have to be doing something when they're together, whether it's shopping, painting their toenails, talking about guys, going out and dancing, whatever... but they look at guys and call them bums and losers for doing nothing. In reality, we aren't doing "nothing" per se, that's just called "chillin" and it's one of the ways we bond. Guys (typically) don't pay as much attention to the lyrics in songs or who sings it, while girls are more sensitive about that. Guys are good drivers, girl's aren't. Guys are more easily entertained by shows like MTV's Jackass, while girls need intricate storylines in stuff like Dawson's Creek. Guys are bigger than girls. Girls are better cooks (not trying to belittle that, but I personally believe that girls are better at paying attention to detail and that makes them better at cooking). Guys are more emotionally stable, girls are emotional rollercoasters - they reach higher highs but lower lows. (A word of advice for guys getting into new relationships: find out as soon as you can when "that time of the month" is and brace yourselves accordingly.) Guys "think the idea of punting a small dog is funny" (quotes because I got that one from one of those email forwards once).
Now, I'm not ripping on either guys or girls here. Not even all of this stuff I'm saying is true because there are plenty of exceptions, and don't be insulted if you're a guy who likes to cook or follows Dawson's Creek. But if you haven't already, think about the things I just wrote and tell me if I'm off base here.
By the way, it's been a slow past few days work-wise, and that is why I have been writing such long entries.
Sunday, June 16, 2002
Baseball
It's always bothered me that surprisingly few people truly enjoy and appreciate the game that is supposed to be "America's Pastime." Personally, I love the game more than any other sport... watching it on TV, watching it live, playing it, playing fantasy baseball, base-ically (ha-ha) anything to do with it. Though I'm sure a lot of people are baseball fans, I would definitely guess that more people nowadays prefer to watch football or basketball, as I always hear the word "boring" used incessantly in association with the game.
Sure, on the surface, baseball seems to be a lot slower than the other sports. Players take timeout in between every pitch or whenever they feel like it. Bulky hitters like Mark McGwire dominating the highlights suggest that most players share a similar physique (or aspire to achieve one like his). Games typically last 3 hours long, but could easily surpass 4 depending on the circumstances, and they play almost every day for a whole summer. Compare that to 2 1/2 hrs for an NBA game (or 2 for NCAA), or NFL's one game a week schedule, and I guess it's somewhat understandable that people get tired of watching baseball.
Those who think speed is not a major factor in baseball, however, are greatly mistaken. I think a good argument could be made that baseball is the most speed-dominated game out there of the 4 major sports, including hockey. For starters, consider that the typical Major League pitcher throws at least a 90 mph fastball. That means that the ball travels from the pitchers hand to the plate in well under a second. Thus, in that fraction of a second, the hitter has to pick up the location of the ball, try to guess what kind of pitch it is, decide to swing, and hit the ball accordingly. That's no easy task, let me just tell you that it's hard enough to play catch with my friend who claims (and I believe him) to throw in the 60's speed-wise.
Speed in the form of a player's ability to run is also a huge factor in baseball. When a fielder has great acceleration, it can make the difference between an out and a triple. When a hitter is extremely fast out of the batters box, (Ichiro is a good example) it forces the defense to hurry, increasing the likelihood of errors as well as adding a dimension to a hitter's On-Base Percentage in the form of infield hits. Being fast out of the box can also save outs by avoiding the back end of double plays. When a baserunner is a threat to steal, it limits the pitcher's effectiveness by forcing him to shorten his delivery, while also making him more apt to throw fastballs rather than off-speed pitches in order to make it easier to prevent a stolen base.
Sure, when it comes to continuous play, baseball is no match for other sports. But to me, there are so many reasons I could list on why its such a great game. There's so many things to consider in every situation, and even after years of watching the sport, I'm still learning more subtleties of the game, because it is by far the most complicated of the major sports.
The human aspect is also much more prominent in baseball, and that is probably the single best thing I like about the game that separates it from the others. Every pitch and every play involves the call of an umpire. Every umpire has his own style and his own strike zone. Every manager is faced with many decisions throughout the game and the way he handles them usually determines the outcome of the game, making him much more important than a coach in basketball or football. To bunt, or not to bunt? Leave the starter in, or take him out for a lefty? Play the infield back with less than 2 outs, or concede the run for an out? Not only this, but there are many unwritten rules within the game that everyone is supposed to play by. Don't steal a base when your team has a big lead. Don't time pitches in the on-deck circle. Don't show up the pitcher after hitting a home run, especially if you're a rookie. Break one of these rules, and you can expect to get a fastball thrown at you or at one of your teammates. Throw at someone who doesn't like it, and risk him charging the mound and the benches clearing for a brawl.
I could go on and on about all the great things about baseball, little and small, that have made me a die-hard fan. But, my blog entries are getting long and boring, and I risk losing the attention of those who actually read it.
It's always bothered me that surprisingly few people truly enjoy and appreciate the game that is supposed to be "America's Pastime." Personally, I love the game more than any other sport... watching it on TV, watching it live, playing it, playing fantasy baseball, base-ically (ha-ha) anything to do with it. Though I'm sure a lot of people are baseball fans, I would definitely guess that more people nowadays prefer to watch football or basketball, as I always hear the word "boring" used incessantly in association with the game.
Sure, on the surface, baseball seems to be a lot slower than the other sports. Players take timeout in between every pitch or whenever they feel like it. Bulky hitters like Mark McGwire dominating the highlights suggest that most players share a similar physique (or aspire to achieve one like his). Games typically last 3 hours long, but could easily surpass 4 depending on the circumstances, and they play almost every day for a whole summer. Compare that to 2 1/2 hrs for an NBA game (or 2 for NCAA), or NFL's one game a week schedule, and I guess it's somewhat understandable that people get tired of watching baseball.
Those who think speed is not a major factor in baseball, however, are greatly mistaken. I think a good argument could be made that baseball is the most speed-dominated game out there of the 4 major sports, including hockey. For starters, consider that the typical Major League pitcher throws at least a 90 mph fastball. That means that the ball travels from the pitchers hand to the plate in well under a second. Thus, in that fraction of a second, the hitter has to pick up the location of the ball, try to guess what kind of pitch it is, decide to swing, and hit the ball accordingly. That's no easy task, let me just tell you that it's hard enough to play catch with my friend who claims (and I believe him) to throw in the 60's speed-wise.
Speed in the form of a player's ability to run is also a huge factor in baseball. When a fielder has great acceleration, it can make the difference between an out and a triple. When a hitter is extremely fast out of the batters box, (Ichiro is a good example) it forces the defense to hurry, increasing the likelihood of errors as well as adding a dimension to a hitter's On-Base Percentage in the form of infield hits. Being fast out of the box can also save outs by avoiding the back end of double plays. When a baserunner is a threat to steal, it limits the pitcher's effectiveness by forcing him to shorten his delivery, while also making him more apt to throw fastballs rather than off-speed pitches in order to make it easier to prevent a stolen base.
Sure, when it comes to continuous play, baseball is no match for other sports. But to me, there are so many reasons I could list on why its such a great game. There's so many things to consider in every situation, and even after years of watching the sport, I'm still learning more subtleties of the game, because it is by far the most complicated of the major sports.
The human aspect is also much more prominent in baseball, and that is probably the single best thing I like about the game that separates it from the others. Every pitch and every play involves the call of an umpire. Every umpire has his own style and his own strike zone. Every manager is faced with many decisions throughout the game and the way he handles them usually determines the outcome of the game, making him much more important than a coach in basketball or football. To bunt, or not to bunt? Leave the starter in, or take him out for a lefty? Play the infield back with less than 2 outs, or concede the run for an out? Not only this, but there are many unwritten rules within the game that everyone is supposed to play by. Don't steal a base when your team has a big lead. Don't time pitches in the on-deck circle. Don't show up the pitcher after hitting a home run, especially if you're a rookie. Break one of these rules, and you can expect to get a fastball thrown at you or at one of your teammates. Throw at someone who doesn't like it, and risk him charging the mound and the benches clearing for a brawl.
I could go on and on about all the great things about baseball, little and small, that have made me a die-hard fan. But, my blog entries are getting long and boring, and I risk losing the attention of those who actually read it.
Thoughts On Looking Young
For as long as I can remember, my appearance has always made people think that I am younger than I am. In an earlier blog I already told the story about the Sox game and how the guy wasn't gonna give me a beach towel, but there are a million other stories I could tell like that one. It's not uncommon for people to mistake my little sister as being older than me. No matter where I am, or what it is, I get asked for ID. Last Spring Break when I went to Vegas, I got carded at every table; at one point I was even carded twice at the same table, when both pit bosses working the area spotted little babyfaced joe at different times (no lie, you can ask the people I went with).
Just today, when I ordered a Bud Light at TGI Fridays during dinner, the waitress (who probably wasn't old enough to drive herself) didn't ask me for ID at first. Me and Olivia looked at each other right away and were both shocked that for once, and maybe one time only, somebody actually looked at me and thought, "He looks old enough, I don't need to check this guy." Of course, that didn't last long cause she ended up asking me for my license anyways when she came back, before handing me the bottle.
Earlier this week, I went with my dad to a store to buy some computer stuff, and since he forgot to bring his wallet, I had to pay wiith my credit card. I can't say for sure if this is because I look young, but the cashier asked to see ID before authorizing my card and signature. I wouldn't be surprised though.
One of the worst ones was sometime this past semester when I went to see a rated R movie. The ticket guy asked me for my ID but not my friend who was with me (who I'm pretty sure was younger than me). Now, at the time, my license was being held as bond for my traffic ticket so I could've been screwed. Oh, but lady luck smiled upon me that night as my friend did have his ID and was able to show that he was 21 and over. Thus, he was an adult and I could watch the movie because I was accompanied by an adult. How awesome! Not only does the guy not think I am 17 and over (I was 22 for those of you keeping count at home), but the only reason I was let in is because I was accompanied by an adult - who is actually a friend that is younger than me and much less mature, I should add.
I can even remember not too long ago, when I was probably 14 or 15, and my parents would still pass me off at Old Country Buffet as a child (12 and under). I was really short back then and didn't really hit my growth spurt till about sophomore or jr year of high school when most people get it around junior high, no later. No girls ever paid attention to me because they like the older-looking guys and that wasn't me (and still isn't... I'm lucky enough to have found a girl who doesn't care).
So, what's funny to everyone else is pretty much an ongoing annoyance and minor insults for me. A lot of people think it's not so bad, plus I know in 10 or 15 years I will be happy I look younger than my peers. But there are times I really think that looking older would be so much better. You know, I wouldn't even be surprised if sometimes I walk into a job interview, and the interviewer takes one look and thinks "we can't hire this guy... no one's gonna respect or listen to a guy that looks like he's in high school." Not that I would blame them, cause can you imagine entrusting an important engineering job to a high schooler, or someone who looks no older than one?
I think what it comes down to is respect... people naturally respect those who look older. Even if I am much more intelligent and mature than someone, they are more likely to command attention or respect if their appearance suggests that they are older. Not the way I'd like it to be, but nothing I can do about it, right? It's just something I will have to live with... what do you all think, should I tape my drivers license to my forehead from now on?
For as long as I can remember, my appearance has always made people think that I am younger than I am. In an earlier blog I already told the story about the Sox game and how the guy wasn't gonna give me a beach towel, but there are a million other stories I could tell like that one. It's not uncommon for people to mistake my little sister as being older than me. No matter where I am, or what it is, I get asked for ID. Last Spring Break when I went to Vegas, I got carded at every table; at one point I was even carded twice at the same table, when both pit bosses working the area spotted little babyfaced joe at different times (no lie, you can ask the people I went with).
Just today, when I ordered a Bud Light at TGI Fridays during dinner, the waitress (who probably wasn't old enough to drive herself) didn't ask me for ID at first. Me and Olivia looked at each other right away and were both shocked that for once, and maybe one time only, somebody actually looked at me and thought, "He looks old enough, I don't need to check this guy." Of course, that didn't last long cause she ended up asking me for my license anyways when she came back, before handing me the bottle.
Earlier this week, I went with my dad to a store to buy some computer stuff, and since he forgot to bring his wallet, I had to pay wiith my credit card. I can't say for sure if this is because I look young, but the cashier asked to see ID before authorizing my card and signature. I wouldn't be surprised though.
One of the worst ones was sometime this past semester when I went to see a rated R movie. The ticket guy asked me for my ID but not my friend who was with me (who I'm pretty sure was younger than me). Now, at the time, my license was being held as bond for my traffic ticket so I could've been screwed. Oh, but lady luck smiled upon me that night as my friend did have his ID and was able to show that he was 21 and over. Thus, he was an adult and I could watch the movie because I was accompanied by an adult. How awesome! Not only does the guy not think I am 17 and over (I was 22 for those of you keeping count at home), but the only reason I was let in is because I was accompanied by an adult - who is actually a friend that is younger than me and much less mature, I should add.
I can even remember not too long ago, when I was probably 14 or 15, and my parents would still pass me off at Old Country Buffet as a child (12 and under). I was really short back then and didn't really hit my growth spurt till about sophomore or jr year of high school when most people get it around junior high, no later. No girls ever paid attention to me because they like the older-looking guys and that wasn't me (and still isn't... I'm lucky enough to have found a girl who doesn't care).
So, what's funny to everyone else is pretty much an ongoing annoyance and minor insults for me. A lot of people think it's not so bad, plus I know in 10 or 15 years I will be happy I look younger than my peers. But there are times I really think that looking older would be so much better. You know, I wouldn't even be surprised if sometimes I walk into a job interview, and the interviewer takes one look and thinks "we can't hire this guy... no one's gonna respect or listen to a guy that looks like he's in high school." Not that I would blame them, cause can you imagine entrusting an important engineering job to a high schooler, or someone who looks no older than one?
I think what it comes down to is respect... people naturally respect those who look older. Even if I am much more intelligent and mature than someone, they are more likely to command attention or respect if their appearance suggests that they are older. Not the way I'd like it to be, but nothing I can do about it, right? It's just something I will have to live with... what do you all think, should I tape my drivers license to my forehead from now on?
Friday, June 14, 2002
My Take on Pop Music... and Music in General
Last year, I wrote a fairly long essay on Britney Spears, detailing several arguments as to why she should not be hated as much as she is, and why people should not immediately rush to judgement when they hear that I'm a fan. Not too long after that, a friend wrote something of his own, the topic being "Why I Hate Pop Music." I've recently been able to read what he wrote, and I think it's worth reading for anyone who is interested. Though I still don't agree with everything he's written, at least it's pretty well organized and thought out (more so than you can say about my britney essay), and it's good to see that he cares about what he is writing, even if it is an opposing view. To read, click here (there is also a link there to my original Britney essay)
Now, hopefully people did not mistake my Britney essay as being a complete endorsement of all that is pop music and pop culture. The essay was, as I said, written more as a defense of Britney, as well as myself, for the reason that nearly every person I knew hated her and ripped on me for being a fan. Also, let me say that I'm definitely not writing this little piece to be meant as a retort to Brian, because the last thing I am interested is engaging in a war of words over something like this. What I'm writing isn't really directly against what he's saying anyways. However, I do want to clarify some things about my personal opinons about pop music, or music in general.
Why I Like(d) Pop Music
First of all, believe it or not, I've never really liked pop music all that much. At the time I wrote the essay, I'll readily admit that I did indeed listen to a lot of the Britney and Christina stuff, or the Backstreet and NSync, etc. This was for a few major reasons:
1. A couple years ago, it seemed to me that a lot of other genres of music were going through a overall down period, lacking much of the originality or inspiration it once had. For example, hip-hop was getting to the point where every song was about big ol' booties and making the benjamins. Alternative music had also become rather old with seemingly the same exact guitar riff heard ubiquitously, not to mention the fact that every lead singer was doing his best Eddie Vedder impersonation. Even in the realm of Christian Contemporary music, I was finding it increasingly hard to identify with any of the newer artists and forced to look back to the good old days of Jars of Clay and DC Talk. (There were exceptions, of course, but I am talking in general). It wasn't that all of this music was terrible, just that it had maybe "fallen back down to earth" from the highs of a few years back.
2. Where unoriginality and a dearth of talent plagued other genres, the world of pop music was ripe with blossoming artists, bringing an intriguing new wave of songs that was taking the pop category to new heights. Long before a beast named TRL invaded this country, my idea of pop music was basically limited to "artists" like Celine Dion or Rod Stewart. That might not have been completely accurate, but at least in my mind, pop music was pretty boring, harmless, 93.9 WLIT stuff (not trying to diss the LITE, I would never). Anyways, when all these new pop songs started coming out with nice beats, catchy tunes, and well-produced videos, it was as if a whole new genre of pop was replacing the old, and I was forced to take notice.
3. I think the opportunity to see Britney Spears live in concert was one of the biggest reasons I became a fan of hers, her music, and other performers like her. It might sound a little dumb, but it's much like how I became so attracted to baseball, or how I became a Sox fan. To make a long story short, my grade school used to give free Sox tickets for Straight A's/Perfect Attendance. The consensus among a lot of people I know is that baseball is boring, and I don't blame them for feeling that way. As for myself, I probably would have the same feelings, had I not been lucky enough to get a chance to go to games at the ballpark in person and appreciate the game, its nuances and just how impressive the scope of the game really is; in other words, things you don't get from watching the highlights or even watching an entire game live on TV. In the same sense, hearing a song on the radio is one thing, seeing it on MTV is another, and experiencing it at a concert is a whole new level of its own. Not that her voice was so much better live (it's mostly lipsync anyways if you didn't figure already), but being able to see such a large-scale production, to understand how much work was put in by everyone involved and really be immersed in the energy of the whole thing was something that surprised me a great deal. The concert in itself didn't make me like pop music, but it did help me to see it in a new light and maybe allowed me to appreciate it more as a different way to enjoy music.
There were some other less obvious reasons that I found myself playing 98 Degrees and Mandy Moore mp3s all the time, but I want to keep this relatively short.
What Has Changed Since Then
Today, I don't listen to nearly as much of the pop stuff as I did back then, though once in a while a song will still catch my ear and invade my head for a while. Why the change, you ask? It's not that I've suddenly decided or realized that pop music is wrong, but there are still logical explanations I can give. For starters, reasons #1 and 2 above don't apply nearly as much to the current music scene as they did back then. Thanks to some great recent work by artists like Incubus, Outkast, U2, or Alicia Keys, there is reason to be optimistic that artistic creativity will once again flourish through the medium of musical expression. (Alicia Keys, by the way, still borders on being pop music but more on that later).
On the other hand, a sharp decline in the quality of today's pop music is proving to be a disturbing reminder of the shortcomings of such a genre (or industry, better put). Not only have shows like "Making the Band" (O-Town) or "Pop Stars" (Eden's Crush) made a complete mockery of anything related to pop music (didn't think it was possible to bring shame to the shameless), but it's also apparent that both time and originality are quickly running out for these people. When Britney, Backstreet, and N Sync first stepped onto the scene in this country, they and their producers had tapped into a void of the American consciousness and were breaking new ground. Say what you will about capitalizing on the young impressionable ones of the nation (with idle time and disposable income), but they had found fertile ground in the market and were good at what they did. Contrast that with today's saturated market; everything being done has already been done, each new boy band or female star is virtually a clone of the previous, and the quality of the music is suffering along with the decline in originality.
To be fair, you couldn't have expected pop's heyday to last forever. After all, bands like Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and Alice in Chains once ruled the airwaves and record sales but eventually they either self-destructed or lost their artistic edge of originality. And once 2Pac got himself rich and moved out of the ghetto, is it any wonder he stopped rapping about the trials of poverty and racism and was left with lyrics about money and hoes? Now in the case of pop music, they were never artistic or inspiring about what they did, but at least they were somewhat original and fresh at one time. As I said, that one positive about pop music back then is now losing its steam, and the inevitable result is that I grow more and more weary of the same old stuff I'm hearing and move back to better written and more relevant material.
Some Final Thoughts
If I had to summarize how I feel about pop music and music in general, the most important thing I would like to say is that there are different kinds of music and that everything should be taken for what it is, without mistaking it for what it's not.
As I've said before, there are some bands and individual artists in the world of music that have produced truly magnificent work by their own creative and original talent. Even I can't deny that this is the highest form of music, when an artist creates something that actually serves to inspire those who can relate to and enjoy it. For me personally, this includes bands like Smashing Pumpkins or artists such as Tori Amos, for example. I can't say enough how much I admire these people for not only their musical talent but also for their amazing intellect and ability to challenge someone like me in the music they create. It's this kind of music that is very, very important to me and dear to my heart for that very reason, and the many great experiences I have encountered in my life because of these artists' contributions have given me truest sense of respect for them.
There are also those in the world of music with great God-given talent, either in the form of a great voice, perhaps as a guitarist, DJ, songwriter, or whatever it is. Based on these talents alone, they still have a great potential to inspire people and provide enjoyment to others, but might not have the experiences to draw from and the ability as a whole artist to generate music that can challenge us intellectually, or in other aspects of life which we might be able to relate to. Some examples I can think of might include Yo-yo Ma, who is an incredibly gifted cellist but is limited in playing music written mostly by other composers. [As a side note, classical composers like Mozart and Beethoven really fascinate me because while their music has no words and was written hundreds of years ago, there's no doubt that their songs have the special ability to transcend speech and time to affect and stimulate people in a way that's hard to explain. And I'm not trying to belittle Yo-Yo Ma in any way, because he still has the ability that few others have to interpret a song with feeling, translating someone else's composition and expressing it in an original manner.] I tend also to believe that Alicia Keys falls into this category. She's got a great voice, but her success has owed much to having great producers and being promoted heavily in the media. I still bought her CD and enjoy listening to it a lot, but I just can't yet justify putting her in the same category as the artists I mentioned above. Of course, she's still young in age and I think as she matures she has the potential to be one of those great artists.
That basically leaves what is, in my opinion, a huge gray area that includes what most people would call pop music, but also includes all of the less musically gifted but still successful people in the industry. Besides the expected list of boy bands and girl groups, and solo pop stars like Britney, I also throw into this group stuff like Limp Bizkit, Ja Rule, Usher, Kid Rock, Pink, Enrique Iglesias, Metallica, or Jennifer Lopez. Basically, anybody whose music lacks any real substance and depends primarily on image, production and promotion, and a certain amount of luck to be where they are. My goal is not to bash all of these people for not being musically talented; after all, I was a big fan of Britney Spears, who is probably the epitome of all these things, and I still follow her music/career to some extent. I'm just saying that the "pop" music we listen to nowadays isn't really just limited to the teenybopper tunes, but that if you stop and think about it carefully, a great deal of what many of us enjoy listening to is actually not much different from, and no better than the typically labeled pop music (at least from an artistic point of view). Within this category, there are still of course different types of performers, and it's also important to note that there are also vast differences in the quality of the music. An analogy that comes to mind is movies: consider the two films Austin Powers and Jingle All The Way (there was nothing else to do on the plane ride to Taiwan). Neither movie is supposed to be inspiring, but I enjoyed Austin Powers because it was well done, while Jingle All The Way still haunts me now and then because it was utter crap.
The point I'm trying to make here, in a circumlocutory way so it seems, is that there are different kinds of music, and from each kind you should already know what to expect. Music in its highest form is meant to be an inspiration; while in other cases, there is music for the less noble purpose of providing entertainment and enjoyment. If someone feels that pop music is so bad that listening to it is a weight on their conscience, or believes that it is so worthless that listening to it is a waste of time, then I can respect that. The people who bother me are the ones who are such huge fans of Limp Bizkit and Ja Rule but find it so compelling to tell me that Britney Spears is terrible. I've never denied that image is one of the biggest, if not the single biggest factor for Britney's success, but image is also just as important for posers like Fred Durst and Ja Rule.
All I'm saying is, listen to the music that you like, but you should always know what you're flooding your brain with; take the serious music seriously, but don't put too much stock in what isn't. To me, it's ok to enjoy a little "candy" while not getting carried away to the point of rotting your teeth. At the same time, I would recommend that everyone should listen to and learn to appreciate at least some quality music because I have found in my own life time after time that great music by great artists makes for great food to the soul. If I can say one last thing in closing: Pop music never was, and never will be a form of artistic expression, but as long as people don't listen to it so much and so exclusively that they lose track of reality, then it's okay in my book.
Last year, I wrote a fairly long essay on Britney Spears, detailing several arguments as to why she should not be hated as much as she is, and why people should not immediately rush to judgement when they hear that I'm a fan. Not too long after that, a friend wrote something of his own, the topic being "Why I Hate Pop Music." I've recently been able to read what he wrote, and I think it's worth reading for anyone who is interested. Though I still don't agree with everything he's written, at least it's pretty well organized and thought out (more so than you can say about my britney essay), and it's good to see that he cares about what he is writing, even if it is an opposing view. To read, click here (there is also a link there to my original Britney essay)
Now, hopefully people did not mistake my Britney essay as being a complete endorsement of all that is pop music and pop culture. The essay was, as I said, written more as a defense of Britney, as well as myself, for the reason that nearly every person I knew hated her and ripped on me for being a fan. Also, let me say that I'm definitely not writing this little piece to be meant as a retort to Brian, because the last thing I am interested is engaging in a war of words over something like this. What I'm writing isn't really directly against what he's saying anyways. However, I do want to clarify some things about my personal opinons about pop music, or music in general.
Why I Like(d) Pop Music
First of all, believe it or not, I've never really liked pop music all that much. At the time I wrote the essay, I'll readily admit that I did indeed listen to a lot of the Britney and Christina stuff, or the Backstreet and NSync, etc. This was for a few major reasons:
1. A couple years ago, it seemed to me that a lot of other genres of music were going through a overall down period, lacking much of the originality or inspiration it once had. For example, hip-hop was getting to the point where every song was about big ol' booties and making the benjamins. Alternative music had also become rather old with seemingly the same exact guitar riff heard ubiquitously, not to mention the fact that every lead singer was doing his best Eddie Vedder impersonation. Even in the realm of Christian Contemporary music, I was finding it increasingly hard to identify with any of the newer artists and forced to look back to the good old days of Jars of Clay and DC Talk. (There were exceptions, of course, but I am talking in general). It wasn't that all of this music was terrible, just that it had maybe "fallen back down to earth" from the highs of a few years back.
2. Where unoriginality and a dearth of talent plagued other genres, the world of pop music was ripe with blossoming artists, bringing an intriguing new wave of songs that was taking the pop category to new heights. Long before a beast named TRL invaded this country, my idea of pop music was basically limited to "artists" like Celine Dion or Rod Stewart. That might not have been completely accurate, but at least in my mind, pop music was pretty boring, harmless, 93.9 WLIT stuff (not trying to diss the LITE, I would never). Anyways, when all these new pop songs started coming out with nice beats, catchy tunes, and well-produced videos, it was as if a whole new genre of pop was replacing the old, and I was forced to take notice.
3. I think the opportunity to see Britney Spears live in concert was one of the biggest reasons I became a fan of hers, her music, and other performers like her. It might sound a little dumb, but it's much like how I became so attracted to baseball, or how I became a Sox fan. To make a long story short, my grade school used to give free Sox tickets for Straight A's/Perfect Attendance. The consensus among a lot of people I know is that baseball is boring, and I don't blame them for feeling that way. As for myself, I probably would have the same feelings, had I not been lucky enough to get a chance to go to games at the ballpark in person and appreciate the game, its nuances and just how impressive the scope of the game really is; in other words, things you don't get from watching the highlights or even watching an entire game live on TV. In the same sense, hearing a song on the radio is one thing, seeing it on MTV is another, and experiencing it at a concert is a whole new level of its own. Not that her voice was so much better live (it's mostly lipsync anyways if you didn't figure already), but being able to see such a large-scale production, to understand how much work was put in by everyone involved and really be immersed in the energy of the whole thing was something that surprised me a great deal. The concert in itself didn't make me like pop music, but it did help me to see it in a new light and maybe allowed me to appreciate it more as a different way to enjoy music.
There were some other less obvious reasons that I found myself playing 98 Degrees and Mandy Moore mp3s all the time, but I want to keep this relatively short.
What Has Changed Since Then
Today, I don't listen to nearly as much of the pop stuff as I did back then, though once in a while a song will still catch my ear and invade my head for a while. Why the change, you ask? It's not that I've suddenly decided or realized that pop music is wrong, but there are still logical explanations I can give. For starters, reasons #1 and 2 above don't apply nearly as much to the current music scene as they did back then. Thanks to some great recent work by artists like Incubus, Outkast, U2, or Alicia Keys, there is reason to be optimistic that artistic creativity will once again flourish through the medium of musical expression. (Alicia Keys, by the way, still borders on being pop music but more on that later).
On the other hand, a sharp decline in the quality of today's pop music is proving to be a disturbing reminder of the shortcomings of such a genre (or industry, better put). Not only have shows like "Making the Band" (O-Town) or "Pop Stars" (Eden's Crush) made a complete mockery of anything related to pop music (didn't think it was possible to bring shame to the shameless), but it's also apparent that both time and originality are quickly running out for these people. When Britney, Backstreet, and N Sync first stepped onto the scene in this country, they and their producers had tapped into a void of the American consciousness and were breaking new ground. Say what you will about capitalizing on the young impressionable ones of the nation (with idle time and disposable income), but they had found fertile ground in the market and were good at what they did. Contrast that with today's saturated market; everything being done has already been done, each new boy band or female star is virtually a clone of the previous, and the quality of the music is suffering along with the decline in originality.
To be fair, you couldn't have expected pop's heyday to last forever. After all, bands like Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and Alice in Chains once ruled the airwaves and record sales but eventually they either self-destructed or lost their artistic edge of originality. And once 2Pac got himself rich and moved out of the ghetto, is it any wonder he stopped rapping about the trials of poverty and racism and was left with lyrics about money and hoes? Now in the case of pop music, they were never artistic or inspiring about what they did, but at least they were somewhat original and fresh at one time. As I said, that one positive about pop music back then is now losing its steam, and the inevitable result is that I grow more and more weary of the same old stuff I'm hearing and move back to better written and more relevant material.
Some Final Thoughts
If I had to summarize how I feel about pop music and music in general, the most important thing I would like to say is that there are different kinds of music and that everything should be taken for what it is, without mistaking it for what it's not.
As I've said before, there are some bands and individual artists in the world of music that have produced truly magnificent work by their own creative and original talent. Even I can't deny that this is the highest form of music, when an artist creates something that actually serves to inspire those who can relate to and enjoy it. For me personally, this includes bands like Smashing Pumpkins or artists such as Tori Amos, for example. I can't say enough how much I admire these people for not only their musical talent but also for their amazing intellect and ability to challenge someone like me in the music they create. It's this kind of music that is very, very important to me and dear to my heart for that very reason, and the many great experiences I have encountered in my life because of these artists' contributions have given me truest sense of respect for them.
There are also those in the world of music with great God-given talent, either in the form of a great voice, perhaps as a guitarist, DJ, songwriter, or whatever it is. Based on these talents alone, they still have a great potential to inspire people and provide enjoyment to others, but might not have the experiences to draw from and the ability as a whole artist to generate music that can challenge us intellectually, or in other aspects of life which we might be able to relate to. Some examples I can think of might include Yo-yo Ma, who is an incredibly gifted cellist but is limited in playing music written mostly by other composers. [As a side note, classical composers like Mozart and Beethoven really fascinate me because while their music has no words and was written hundreds of years ago, there's no doubt that their songs have the special ability to transcend speech and time to affect and stimulate people in a way that's hard to explain. And I'm not trying to belittle Yo-Yo Ma in any way, because he still has the ability that few others have to interpret a song with feeling, translating someone else's composition and expressing it in an original manner.] I tend also to believe that Alicia Keys falls into this category. She's got a great voice, but her success has owed much to having great producers and being promoted heavily in the media. I still bought her CD and enjoy listening to it a lot, but I just can't yet justify putting her in the same category as the artists I mentioned above. Of course, she's still young in age and I think as she matures she has the potential to be one of those great artists.
That basically leaves what is, in my opinion, a huge gray area that includes what most people would call pop music, but also includes all of the less musically gifted but still successful people in the industry. Besides the expected list of boy bands and girl groups, and solo pop stars like Britney, I also throw into this group stuff like Limp Bizkit, Ja Rule, Usher, Kid Rock, Pink, Enrique Iglesias, Metallica, or Jennifer Lopez. Basically, anybody whose music lacks any real substance and depends primarily on image, production and promotion, and a certain amount of luck to be where they are. My goal is not to bash all of these people for not being musically talented; after all, I was a big fan of Britney Spears, who is probably the epitome of all these things, and I still follow her music/career to some extent. I'm just saying that the "pop" music we listen to nowadays isn't really just limited to the teenybopper tunes, but that if you stop and think about it carefully, a great deal of what many of us enjoy listening to is actually not much different from, and no better than the typically labeled pop music (at least from an artistic point of view). Within this category, there are still of course different types of performers, and it's also important to note that there are also vast differences in the quality of the music. An analogy that comes to mind is movies: consider the two films Austin Powers and Jingle All The Way (there was nothing else to do on the plane ride to Taiwan). Neither movie is supposed to be inspiring, but I enjoyed Austin Powers because it was well done, while Jingle All The Way still haunts me now and then because it was utter crap.
The point I'm trying to make here, in a circumlocutory way so it seems, is that there are different kinds of music, and from each kind you should already know what to expect. Music in its highest form is meant to be an inspiration; while in other cases, there is music for the less noble purpose of providing entertainment and enjoyment. If someone feels that pop music is so bad that listening to it is a weight on their conscience, or believes that it is so worthless that listening to it is a waste of time, then I can respect that. The people who bother me are the ones who are such huge fans of Limp Bizkit and Ja Rule but find it so compelling to tell me that Britney Spears is terrible. I've never denied that image is one of the biggest, if not the single biggest factor for Britney's success, but image is also just as important for posers like Fred Durst and Ja Rule.
All I'm saying is, listen to the music that you like, but you should always know what you're flooding your brain with; take the serious music seriously, but don't put too much stock in what isn't. To me, it's ok to enjoy a little "candy" while not getting carried away to the point of rotting your teeth. At the same time, I would recommend that everyone should listen to and learn to appreciate at least some quality music because I have found in my own life time after time that great music by great artists makes for great food to the soul. If I can say one last thing in closing: Pop music never was, and never will be a form of artistic expression, but as long as people don't listen to it so much and so exclusively that they lose track of reality, then it's okay in my book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)