JSngry

Lucid!

Try this one:

Yes it is. Insanity is a human trait, and where humans go, politics are sure to follow. You should say it's just plain fucked up, period. And anybody who would disagree with that, THEY'RE insane. It's Jordi Puhol Syndrome!!!!

Gaga's really not about music, that's what I think. She's very intelligent, artistic even, but she's not really about music, not as an end to itself. She's about a total product, package, image, concept. Singing is included, but I've heard some live things that show her to be somebody with good raw tools, but not at all developed. But that's ok, for what she's up to, that's ok. IMO, she's state-of-the-art as far as actively engaging in pop culture in a knowing way. And if I think she's state-of-the-art, that almost certainly means that somebody's already coming up behind her that I just don't know about yet. She knows what she's doing, pretty much exactly. As did Madonna. Madonna worked it really well at least until she was about 45 or so and then kept going without totally losing cred. Gaga seems to be setting her sights on that same sort of path/career arc, and so far she's doing just fine at it. But here again - the youth were into Gaga first. The people I knew who were really into her at first were all kids of my friends. THEY got their folks (usually dads) into her. I noticed her pivot from pure youth culture to a more "mature" angle when she hosted SNL a few years ago, she did a skit about how when she was old, nobody would remember her and shit like that. She played herself older. Pretty self-aware, which is where the longevity is in a pop icon's survival. KNOWING that you're a product and rolling with it, owning it. IMO. But dude, guys your age (what did you say you were, 46?), hey, she's got a killer body from top to bottom, is not afraid to use it as a prop, and she's 15 or so years younger than y'all. Whatever the intellectual appeal (and I'm not minimizing the potential for that)....just sayin'. It's not a new story, she knows that, and she's working it like a virtuoso. And that is a compliment, seriously. She knows how to get your attention, and then hold it. Not just anybody can do that at the level she does it. That's what I think, to the extent that I care. I'm more than willing to neither care nor try to. And my opinion is really NOT relevant. It's NICE to be irrelevant about stuff like this, really, it is!

talk about knowing your history and being able to find your own voice inside AND outside of it! Or else it's just an amazing coincidence.

I'd think that a lot of people 30-44 would be familiar with Miley Cyrus. She's been in the spotlight in some form or fashion since 2006. If nothing else, their kid sisters would have watched Hanna Montana. Dude, if you bought ANYTHING for a teenager damn near ANYWHERE back in those days, that Hanna Montana shit was inescapable. 13 years is a long time when you're young. GOT first went on the air in 2011 - 8 years ago. So move that core demographic back to 22-36. 36 is still that "young-ish" age, around the time where you start getting middle-aged but think you're not. Or at least HOPE you're not. Seriously, depending on when/if you've started a family, things evolve (and they should). And of course there's a "lot of help" involved. There's a multi-billion dollar industry built around it, most all of which ends up putting money in must-assuredly not young people's pockets. But that's the Man Behind The Curtain Syndrome. Pop culture itself gleefully seizes on the moment as where it finds it and never looks behind the curtain until it's too late. That man stays ahead of them, always. Of course, I kinda keep an eye on things, just because old habits die hard, and partially because my kinds are still young enough to be into it in the way that only truly young people can be. It was my son and his wife (then girlfriend) who were in on GOT from the git-go. They're both 33 now, so do that math. And they DO have an opinion about Miley Cyrus, which is that they don't really want to see her ever again. But - they've seen her in the context of a real-time, that's ALL they know baseline that people who are older just don't get any other time except at that time of their life. Their dislike is SO much more relevant than my indifference. And as they have their own adult lives and relationships, I can see them already losing interest in fads and such. Whoever the next Miley Cyrus is, they won't care at all. The one AFTER the next one, they might well be the parent of a kid who cares. And so it goes. And fwiw, my indifference doesn't mean that it's not interesting to watch her evolve, nor that it won't be fun to watch her continue to evolve. But it does mean that when that when she's not on center stage any more and the only people who still care start filing in from the Nostalgia Culture lobby, I'll either be dead or will have not noticed her absence. That's gonna be somebody else's party. I dunno man, maybe It's A Grandparent Thing And You Wouldn't Understand. at this time. With any luck, in time you will..

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/who-is-shakespeare-emilia-bassano/588076/?utm_source=pocket-newtab I have no opinion, but the "identity debate" around Shakespeare is always entertaining for me. Enjoy!

Now, if that means something different to you than it does to me, ok. I'm not hear to mindfuck your vocabulary. But I do think its one of those things that everybody likes to think they belong to, but really, they don't. "pop" is by definition (imo) always in front (the better to collect the money and rotate the product), and at some point, it's is truly meet, right, and salutary for people to get out of all that mess, they got their own place to go to. And that, to me, is the mindfuck of nostalgia culture. It's pop culture for people who no longer are pop but still want to be marketed to. And yes - The Wire is one of the greatest shows ever. But if you come to it later (and I did), forget about it being pop culture. It's now just history. Right now it is, hell yeah. I'll be damned if I can talk to anybody under 35 who is not talking about it ALL the time. And I've yet to watch an episode. someday, maybe. After its history!

Pop! Seriously, though. "Pop Culture" is just what it says - the culture of all things in and around "pop". Not popular, because then Branson would be a hub of pop culture, right? Pop, with it now, people wanting to belong to the same now as "everybody else", belonging first, discernment later (if ever). There's a default to a lack of maturity (as distinguished from immaturity) that is built-in to being young, pop culture scouts, signs, glorifies, and then releases as needed. Few surivive, few are supposed to. Disposability is built in, the only real anecdote is nostalgia, which is not pop culture, that's a thing unto itself.

No, I think the worst sounding version of this record ever is the truck stop bootleg 8-Track I think I still have somewhere.

Ok, I gotta ask - what about a Mickey Tucker record puts you in mind of Johnny Carson music?

I like to think of it like, if you know David S. Ware, you have a link to Sonny Rollins. and if you have a link to Sonny Rollins, you have a link to Coleman Hawkins. Like that, it's there if you want it. But only a rare few of us actually knew Coleman Hawkins as a living human. And from everything I can gather, he was one helluva MASSIVE living human. his knowledge, his presence, just HIM. That's the thing people my age will never have. But again, if you have David S. Ware...

Hell, maybe you were a weird kid. Plenty of them around, then and now. With a few exceptions, I was completely out of "rock" from about 1969 on. so I was an outlier within my own demographic. But my demographic most certainly was driving the pop culture the day. "Pop culture" by definition deals with input and output geared towards a mass entity, a bulk value. If there's more outliers than not, it's not pop culture. So, if you were an outlier to the whole Madonna thing in your day, of course you would not be a part of driving pop culture. But that's you specifically. Your bulk demographic certainly felt otherwise. Just because you're engaged in elements of today's pop culture, don't mistake that for actually being a part of what's driving it. If it makes you feel good, hey. Just saying, Miley Cyrus, no matter how much you like her, is not looking at you or your demographic as her most important audience, nor is the industry around her. She might pivot, like Gaga, to accommodate her own aging, but just remember - you had your chance with Madonna and Madonna will always be closer to your age than you are to Miley Cyrus. And at some point, they'll all be old.

Yeah, that used to be the norm for Stereo/Mono, back when mono still sold well enough for it to matter. One cover slick for both. Usually the catalog # would be positioned in such a way that it would reflect which one it ws, but maybe at this point in Prestige history, they didn't find that a justifiable expense.

Dude, pay attention. I know it's Friday, but still... My comment was about Miley Cyrus. You inferred that to refer to "music". I corrected you misassumption and pointed out that no, point not about music, point about pop culture. Music is but one component of pop culture, possibly the least significant part of it, actually. But anyway, I commented, you misunderstood, I clarified, and now you're still Angry Clown-ing. Not my problem. For some reason, you act like you want to believe that your demographic is still a driving factor in pop culture. That's understandable, because you still have kids at home. But time will do what it do, and the older they get, the more you'll see that whatever interaction you have with it becomes increasingly from the POV of a spectator. And then at some point, really, there will be a generation or two removed pop culture equivalent of today's Miley Cyrus and you will SO not give a fuck about any of it unless you're a professional sociologist or something like that. Otherwise it will just be weird.

If Pop Culture sees you/us at all, it's as a Wallet Waiting To Happentm for a 2 Billion CD/DVD/Holograph Combo of the Woodstock festival. And I'm totally ok with that. My withdrawal was as gradual and natural as it was inevitable and welcome.

Lash on, bro, LASH ON!!! maybe YOU'RE the target market for a twerking teenager growing up right before our eyes (although, if Miley has Daddy issues, maybe you unwittingly actually are), but I'm not sure I'd advertise that on this part of the internet! Otherwise, yeah, 40-something white guys drive pop/youth culture. SURE they do.

"Music" has got jackshit to do with it. Pop culture! You can have an opinion all you want, and you may think its relevant, but that's the great conceit/delusion of middle-age and older, that what we think about pop culture matters. It happens without us, and gleefully so. Our only possible role is to be/act pissed off to drive commerce. If we're anything, we're their poor ignorant slutwhores. And we LOVE it! Until we don't give a damn anymore.

LOL-ing at the notion that anybody over the age of 30 or so feels the need (much less the ability!) to have a "relevant opinion" about Miley Cyrus.

He certainly did come off as a bitter old man, probably was (and quite possibly justifiable so). And I recall him being very vocal (and unequivocal) about his negative opinion of the current Israeli government. But hey. That was him, you knew where he stood when he was alive, and you know where he stood now that he's dead. No surprises, and judging by how he presented himself, no regrets. We should all die with that much transparency of our life intact. I doubt any of us will.

You might get a kick out of the fact that I had an intense bout of CRS last night when listening to this BFT for the first time. I knew that song, knew that record, knew it was some Blue Note boogaloo, but could not for the life of me remember which one it was. Bugged the piss outta me too, went to bed thinking about it, running through possibilities, nothing clicked. And I knew I had this record too...but that didn't help. Not just brain farts, brain....implosion. But I woke up this morning, started hearing the riff in my head and just said, oh yeah, Mustang, Donald Byrd, Curtis Amy, Verve. Hog on bari. Of course!!! Literally rolled out of bed and there it all was in the head. I tell you, I'm only 63, but the cognitive powers are not what they used to be. Well, they are, but it takes longer now for them to get going

Geez, dude, get it right. In the thread, what you attribute to Larry Kart is actually a quote from Moms Mobley. What Larry Kart himself actually said is: Chris comes from Denmark and arrived here under by-the-bootstraps circumstances, I believe. He had a job in radio for many years at a public station and produced a number of important recordings, especially of New Orleans and other older musicians who otherwise might have been forgotten. He's been a freelance music journalist. He wrote one of the best jazz biographies. Yeah, facts matter. So get it right, okay?

There's a lot of bebop in this presentation, although it's never presented as such...Kenton would never admit to following anybody or anything...that's one of his , uh...."quirks" that could get in the way of enjoying the musics that were made with his name on them. June Christy scatting "How High The Moon" in 1948 on "A Concert Of Progressive Jazz"? Hmmmm... "Elegy For Alto" is a really neat piece though, as is "Interlude".

Yeah, very much like that, only with "progressive" and "modern" and words like that. Still, this would have worked just fine as is. Lunceford on steroids (and did you know that Howard Rumsey played an electric upright bass in this band? Insertional already, that Stan Kenton guy was!!!!)