advanced theory blog

Where Am I?

2010-12-27T17:11:00.002-05:00

I haven't been writing much because most of my time is taken up by my job, raising kids, and working on new book ideas. However, I am regularly updating...

Twitter: @advancedgenius
facebook: Advanced Genius Theory

And writing a weekly column each Friday at...
Death + Taxes.

I'm sure I'll get back to blogging eventually.

Thanks!

Lou Reed Creates Video for Susan Boyle

2010-11-07T11:09:00.000-05:00

Lou Reed creates 'intimate' video for Susan Boyle's 'Perfect Day' cover | News | NME.COM

A bit of it:

Lou Reed has masterminded the video for Susan Boyle's version of 'Perfect Day' just months after banning her from covering his 1972 classic.

Reed refused to let Boyle cover the track on an episode of America's Got Talent earlier this year, but had a change of heart a few weeks later and allowed her to include the track on her album.

Following the u-turn, Reed asked to be in involved in the production of the video, which was shot on the banks of Loch Lomond, according to the Sunday Mail.

"I wanted to create a beautiful and intimate piece shot in Susan's native Scotland and she quickly agreed," Reed told the newspaper.

So sweet! And Advanced, of course.

Moe Tucker: Tea Party Activist

2010-10-20T12:33:00.000-04:00

Is Moe Tucker a mama grizzly? Here's the background:

In April 2009, WALB-TV aired a story about a Tea Party rally in nearby Tifton, Georgia. About two-and-a-half minutes into the feature, one "Maureen Tucker, Tea Party Supporter" was quoted as saying, "I'm furious about the way we're being led toward socialism. I'm furious about the incredible waste of money, when things that we really need and are important get dropped, because there's no money left."

Eighteen months later, the news story somehow ended up posted on YouTube, and the blogosphere started buzzing. Could this actually be Moe Tucker, former drummer for the Velvet Underground, one of the most influential and iconic rock bands of all time? All signs pointed to yes. It certainly looked like Tucker, and it was well known that she'd moved to southern Georgia with her family decades earlier. The Huffington Post confirmed the story by reaching Tucker at home; she wouldn't discuss the matter or her political views any further.

For a few days - practically dog years in Internet time - the reaction was swift and furious. Liberals declared themselves depressed and shocked that one of their idols was caught on tape speaking out against a Democratic administration. Some conservatives, meanwhile, congratulated her on her courage and welcomed her to their presumptive fold next to noted right-wing rockers Johnny Ramone and Alice Cooper.

We were curious to know more from Tucker herself, so we tracked her down and asked for an interview. She agreed to answer some questions via email.

Read the interview here. Short answer is that she thinks poor people shouldn't have five pairs of shoes, unions shouldn't be helped by the government, we shouldn't build turtle tunnels, and all politicians are liars and cheats.

Stephen Colbert Advanced? A Reader Wants to Know

2010-10-09T12:58:00.000-04:00

Got a note from Kathy, who asks:

Do you think Stephen Colbert is an Advanced Genius or merely a genius? He is a best-selling author, Emmy and Peabody award winner, has his own virtual country (the Colbert Nation) and his own TV show. Yet his recent appearance before Congress has caused many people to ask "What was he thinking?" Others have said he was making a mockery of Congress. And this is a man who has:

a) Skewered President George W. Bush TO HIS FACE at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2006;

b) Made the cover of SPORTS ILLUSTRATED as a "member" of the U.S. speedskating team at the Vancouver Olympics;

c) Had a treadmill in the new wing at the International Space Station named for him;

d) Had his head shaved by General Ray Odierno while entertaining US troops in Iraq.

Need I say more? Has this man raised satire to heights never seen before or what? I rest my case.

At first I sort of dismissed the idea that Colbert could be Advanced. Great, sure, but Advanced? Then I started to think: he was a part of the brilliant Dana Carvey show, which was underappreciated and misunderstood. He has been doing great stuff for 15 years. He was Tea Party (if satirically) before the movement began, so he was ahead of his time. He is religious. He has embraced technology (see space treadmill). And he went solo, leaving The Daily Show for his own program. These are all good things. The only issue is that everyone respects him, or at least all of his original fans,who are the ones that must be betrayed.

I will say that his counter rally to the Stewart Rally to Restore Sanity could be seen as an almost Ralph Nader-like undercutting of what could actually create serious conversation about whether we have all gone crazy. I kind of wish he weren't doing it, so that's kind of promising. But really, he's yet to make his base mad and no one would argue that he has lost it.

I think that if anything he is an Advanced Irritant for the reasons Kathy listed above. He went in front of the President of the United States and showed him no more respect than the comedians showed Chevy Chase at his celebrity roast on Comedy Central. Jon Stewart accused "Crossfire" of hurting America, but he wasn't in the same room with them, as I remember, and regardless, those guys were clowns.

His latest appearance in front of Congress was arguably even better because he was there for a serious cause that he really believed in, and yet he stayed more or less in character the whole time. For people who think James Franco is doing some chancy stuff, let's seem him be "James Franco" during a hearing in front of a judiciary subcommittee.

If he wants to Advance, he can, but until then, he'll just be the second funniest guy from South Carolina currently working today.

Annoying Critics' Tricks: Zach Galifianakis Edition

2010-10-08T09:10:00.000-04:00

A.O. Scott has a review of "It's Kind of a Funny Story" in today's New York Times. Here's the annoying part:

Mr. Gilchrist is a friendly, somewhat tentative screen presence, but Craig has enough intelligence and humor to be both an agreeable central character and a charming guide to life in the adult psych ward. (The teenage ward is closed for renovation). He has a morose roommate named Muqtada (Bernard White), and a chorus of would-be mentors, the most important of whom is Bobby, a soulful, scatterbrained schlemiel played, it is almost redundant to say, by Zach Galifianakis.

Mr. Galifianakis is everywhere these days — the most in-demand tubby comic sidekick since the heyday of Jonah Hill, which I guess was about six months ago. Mr. Galifianakis’s Gleasonesque movements and deadpan, behind-the-beat timing serve him well in this role, as does his ability to seem completely in earnest even when his actions and utterances are bizarre or nonsensical. Bobby is credibly troubled, neither a holy fool nor an over-the-top goofball, and his moments of wisdom are as believable as his bouts of instability.

Why would Scott feel the need to make such snide remarks about Galifianakis when apparently he is good in the movie? And I really don't see why he feels the need to insult Jonah Hill. Or is he insulting filmmakers who use him? Or us for liking it? Or society for quickly changing our preference for "tubby comic sidekicks"? The review is perfectly fine without this bit that adds exactly nothing to our understanding of the film's quality.

Annoying Critics' Tricks: B. R. Myers Edition

2010-10-02T15:01:00.001-04:00

B.R. Myers reviewed Jonathan Franzen’s Freedom. Here are the annoying parts, or, at least, some of them:

The language a writer uses to create a world is that world, and Franzen’s strenuously contemporary and therefore juvenile language is a world in which nothing important can happen.

It's difficult to tell if Myers is objecting to the use of contemporary language or just using it strenuously, but "contemporary" does not necessarily mean "juvenile, even if you put the word therefore before the pronouncement. Furthermore, important things can happen in a world built of contemporary or juvenile language. Critics enjoy noting that a work of art violates some universal rule, making it inferior. This despite the fact that many great works violated some rule or another. For instance, not many writing instructors would tell you to stick a bunch of details about whaling into your novel that is about much more than a whale. But Melville made it work.My point is not that it is unfair to say that something has made choices that the critic doesn't agree with, but it is not enough just to say, "the author did this, therefore the book sucks." There are no universal rules. (I know what you're thinking.)

The same narrator who gives us “sucked” and “very into” also deploys compound adjectives, bursts of journalese, and long if syntactically crude sentences. An idiosyncratic mix? Far from it. We find the same insecure style on The Daily Show and in the blogosphere; we overhear it on the subway.

The first part of this is a list of adjectives that I suppose are to be taken as pejorative, but Myers gives us no reason to think so other than a snarky tone. Then he brings up a pop culture reference, which according to him makes a work of fiction unserious. Guess it's okay for a review. But anyway, is there something insecure about The Daily Show? And are the show's writers known for using compound adjectives? And if I hear one more person erupting into bursts of journalese, using long if syntactically crude sentences, I'll explode! By the way, not everyone reading the review lives in New York, so what's the "we" business? How about "one" or "New Yorkers"?

Emphatic lines of dialogue continue to appear, chat-room-style, in capital letters sans exclamation marks: “I KNOW IT’S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.”

First the blogosphere, now chat rooms! What does Myers have against the Internet anyway? And why do we have to know what something sounds like when we read it? Maybe Franzen is challenging you to use your imagination or has created some unique? Maybe not, but the mere fact that Myers can't imagine it doesn't make the technique a bad one. One more thing: my personal rule is that people who say "sans" are unserious, and therefore this review is completely bogus.

Why was Freedom written? The prologue raises expectations for a socially engaged, or at least social, narrative that are left unmet. Too much of it takes place in high school, college, or suburbia; how odd that a kind of fiction allegedly made necessary by America’s unique vitality always returns to the places that change the least. Franzen clearly has little interest in the world of work. (The same applies, incidentally, to whoever edited the novel.) Of the four main characters, only Walter has a real job, about which we learn nothing until it becomes a matter of traveling around with an admiring young assistant. (American novelists never tire of the student-don romance; they just dress it up in different clothes.) Walter is constantly holding forth on issues he has researched, but not dramatically experienced. They are entertaining tirades, but this is not what fiction is for.

Myers doesn't tell us what fiction is for.

When Joey and a girl fly to Argentina, Pirates of the Caribbean is playing on the seat backs in front of them. Facile, yes, but Franzen knows his market. Many people who eschew great books for the latest novels do so because they want precisely this kind of thing. (Every new book we read in our brief and busy lives means that a classic is left unread.) These readers want a world that is recognizably their own in every trivial particular, right down to Twitter, even if the book says less of real relevance to their lives than one written a century ago.

And now Twitter! Myers not only imagines what Franzen's "market" is, but what they want. He also knows it is inferior to what it is they should want, and that is: to read old books. I'm going to finish with a thought about that ridiculous line, "Every new book we read in our brief and busy lives means that a classic is left unread." Is he saying we should read only classics? Do we need to be told beforehand that a book is good before we should waste our time reading it? And who defines classic? And what reader hasn't had the very same thought (should I be reading Balzac instead of Stephen King)? Myers would have us discover nothing on our own, ignore contemporary writers who have the audacity to write about what they see today rather than pretending those things don't exist because it violates what "should be" featured in a work of fiction.

I think that sucks, dude!

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame: It's Okay, Even With All-Star Jams

2010-10-01T14:39:00.000-04:00

I've started doing a weekly column with a site called Death and Taxes. The first entry is about the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Here's a taste:

Every year when Hall of Fame nominees are announced, I hear the same two complaints: “so and so isn’t rock and roll” and “there shouldn’t even be a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.” These reactions reveal something interesting about rock and roll: no one can say definitively what it sounds like. Though most would agree that Elvis Presley was one of the first rock and roll singers, his music was as diverse as that of this year’s nominees. Even in the early Sun sessions—rock’s nativity scene—Elvis did a version of “Blue Moon” that is less rock and roll than just about any Donna Summer song. Aerosmith, the Police, Joy Division, the Doors, Devo, they are all recognized as rock bands, and yet they have almost nothing in common.

Of course most of us recognize that rock and roll means different things to different people, and for the most part we’ve made our peace with it. So instead of trying to define the genre in terms of chords, time signatures, or lyrical content, we have decided that the one thing all rock and roll must have is a spirit of rebellion against the establishment, or The Man. Therefore many reject the premise of the Hall of Fame because putting rock and roll in a museum is an admission that it has been officially annexed by The Man. But this makes very little sense, and here’s why:

Go to the site to find out why. (Lame trick, but it wasn't totally on purpose.)

Excerpt From Advanced Genius Theory: Joe Walsh

2010-09-24T11:54:00.000-04:00

As a kid, I was fascinated by the weird noise in the middle of Joe Walsh's single "Life's Been Good." To this day, I still don't really know how it was made, but I like to think that it is what Walsh hears inside his brain, sort of like the way kids in Charlie Brown specials hear adults. Much later I discovered the James Gang, the best American rock trio of all time, which made his participation in the Eagles confusing. He was so great in his own band and as a solo artist, so it made little sense that he would join a band where he would be relegated to writing a couple of songs, playing an occasional solo, and being a backup singer. At one time I thought that maybe that arrangement was pretty good for him: He got to be in one of the biggest bands in the world without having to be the front man, which would leave plenty of time for his true loves, drinking and doing drugs. Since the Theory came to me, however, I've realized that the problem was that I was trying to make sense out of someone who makes no sense. You could go out of your mind trying to figure out why one of the greatest rock guitarists ever would make an album called Got Any Gum? There's just not a satisfactory answer to it. Sadly, though I'd like to say that his behavior is attributable to Advancement, I really can't. True, he did go solo, join another band, abuse drugs, and clean up, which is commendable. But he doesn’t quite make the cut, and belongs in either the Refined Overt class or perhaps the Authentically Weird class.

Annoying Critics' Tricks: Woody Allen Version

2010-09-22T09:40:00.000-04:00

A.O. Scott has reviewed Woody Allen's latest movie in the NY Times. Here are the annoying parts:

"The metaphysical pessimism that constitutes Mr. Allen’s annual greeting-card message to the human race — just in case we needed reminding that our existence is meaningless — is served up in “Tall Dark Stranger” with a wry shrug and an amusing flurry of coincidences, reversals and semi-surprises."

Note that he brings up Allen's record of making a movie each year, which is an implicit criticism of the director. It is to be understood that he makes movies too fast--we don't know how fast a movie should be made, but we know one per year is too fast! He goes for a double by pointing out that all of his movies are the same, because Scoop, Match Point, Vicky Cristian Barcelona, Small Time Crooks, Everyone Says I Love You are basically identical. Except they aren't, but why think about it more than you need to when you can take a cheap shot?

"At this point in his career — 40 features in about as many years — Mr. Allen has both mastered his craft and grown indifferent to it. Does he take any pleasure in making these movies? Does he expect the audience to take any? It’s hard to say, since he seems to make films, and we seem to watch them (at least those of us who still do), more through force of habit than because of any great inspiration or conviction. Given the nonexistence of any controlling moral order in the universe, what else can we do? And what else would we want him to do"

Ha ha ha ha ha! The annoying trick used here is to imagine that Allen has become indifferent to making films. What is the evidence? Certainly not that he chooses to uproot himself from his New York home to shoot films in other countries because he can't get financing in the US. If he were truly indifferent, he would allow US financiers to give him notes, thus making it possible for him to stay at home where he is happiness. The other annoying trick is that Scott pretends to know why "we" watch Woody Allen's movies. I don't watch them out of habit, unless watching movies that I know are going to be at least decent and sometimes great. Scott watches them because he gets paid to!

"Since Mr. Allen is a notoriously nondirective director of actors, the performances in his movies tend to be all over the map, and “You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger” is more scattershot than most. Mr. Brolin, angry and sweaty, with a bad haircut and a wardrobe stolen from a graduate student’s closet sometime in the late 1970s...."

There's that indifferent Allen letting his actors go wild. If only he cared more, maybe some actors in his films might get recognized for their work with, oh, Academy Awards nominations. But wait! Lots of actors have been nominated and even won for their work in his movies. Of course, that's before he let his actors sweat and have bad clothes. Wait, is that a criticism of the movie? The hair and clothes?

"The more ridiculous manifestations of faith — notably Helena’s spiritualism, which leads her into romance with the owner of an occult bookshop — are more charming and more persuasive than the earnest pursuits of love and success that drive most of the people in this overcrowded movie. For the most part, everyone struggles through, with at best mixed success. The audience included."

Here he goes lumping himself in with everyone else. Don't say "the audience," when you mean "the paid reviewers whose preconceptions need to be overcome for them to enjoy the film." But I guess it's a hard habit to break.

Tom Waits and the Internet: Death of Wonder

2010-09-17T17:35:00.000-04:00

I just got finished reading a book about Tom Waits, "Lowside of the Road" by Barney Hoskyns. One line struck me, and luckily it is in this review, so I don't have to type it:

As Hoskyns points out, "Waits's deepest conviction was that truth was overrated." He quotes the singer ranting about a "deficit of wonder in the world. We live in an age when you can casually say to someone, 'What's the story on that?' and they will run to the computer and tell you within five seconds. That's fine but I'd just as soon continue wondering." On this occasion, I'm with Tom, and despite all his efforts, by the end, I've a suspicion Hoskyns is, too.

I disagree with Waits and the reviewer. I think being able to look up things that have easy answers just gives us time to wonder about stuff that is more interesting, mysterious, magical, etc. For instance, the very thought of being able to find answers that quickly should inspire wonder. Pretty good book, though. I found it on the Internet.

Excerpt From Advanced Genius Theory: Roy Orbison

2010-09-14T17:58:00.000-04:00

No one is more revered by great musicians of a certain age than Roy Orbison. Luckily before he died he got to play with many of them—Elvis Costello, Tom Waits, Bruce Springsteen—for a show that will definitely be a part of your next PBS pledge drive. Orbison’s great claim to Advancement, as opposed to plain greatness, is his look: all black clothes, dark sunglasses, and ragged, black hair that looked like a crooked wig (which it may have been). He was also in the Traveling Wilburys, which is another notch in the win column. But what intrigues me is that he wrote maybe 10 of the greatest songs in the history of rock’n’roll, but growing up I thought the only song he ever did was “Oh! Pretty Woman,” a perception he helped along by playing only that song on TV appearances. This is very similar to Lou Reed’s playing nothing but “Walk on the Wild Side” for about 15 years. I can only imagine how frustrated Tom Waits must have been watching Orbison play that song to Johnny Carson for the ninetieth time, especially since a lot of kids were probably wondering why some weird old guy was covering a Van Halen song. I don’t think, though, that Roy Orbison is truly Advanced, even though he was such an inspiration to so many Advanced Musicians. Ultimately I think he was just an angst-ridden, slightly mysterious nerd who wore black because it was a way for him to seem cool. I guess you could say he was the Trent Reznor of his time, only without all the weightlifting.

Jeff Beck: A Reader Weighs In

2010-09-09T09:09:00.000-04:00

I got an email from a reader named Julian, who takes issue with the issue I took with Jeff Beck. I have to admit, that I had not given a ton of thought about Beck before dismissing him. After reading Julian's email, I have to say that I might have missed out on something. Here's the email:

Let me get to the point. Jeff Beck on your blog is in a top 10 worst category . I suggest, instead, he reached the level of Lou Reed. He is one of the most advanced musicians (or guitarists, not necessarily the same) of our time. Why?

First, your reaction right now, which is likely, "No way in Hell!" I imagine other readers would share this sentiment. But let me make a case (as briefly as possible).

In the 60’s, Jeff plays in the Yardbirds, and unlike Clapton, he goes 'Hollywood', loving every minute of fame (they kick HIM out). Following that, he gets Rod Stewart to make an album at least as good as Zeppelin I (Truth). How good? Jimmy Page steals much of the material for Zep I. Any artist would duplicate his initial masterpiece (as Page did with Zeppelin II), but Beck switches gears. To make a long story short, after a bit of time, he ventures into fusion, which is weird, and cool. During this time, he plays with Stevie Wonder. Perhaps a clear early sign of advanced potential is that he gets asked to join the Rolling Stones and turns them down. OK, snobby overt folks could say this is a sign of his great love of making pure music. But the stage is set. At this point (mid to late 70’s), he is seen as a serious jazz player, having seemingly banked his reputation on serious music

Then, in the 80's he puts out Flash which is destroyed by every critic. It is a big pop, drum machine sell-out. But, the album (as you say in the context of the 80's) is actually his best in a decade, and he clearly kicks major a**. He admits at the time and to this day that he wanted a big hit to make lots of money (not an overt stance at all). He's dead as far as anyone is concerned, and he goes to work on cars for a couple years. Out of nowhere, he puts out Guitar Shop (around 1989?) and everyone (critics and public) flips out because this is an incredibly perfect album. If I remember one review, it said only this, "put down your magazine and go buy this album". All his irritated fans are back now.

So what does he do? He works on cars again. He tours a bit, sure, but spends much of the early 90's building cars. Then he comes back with a couple Techno albums. Techno? These go nowhere. In the techno period, he does an obscure 50's tribute album to Gene Vincent, but DOESN'T put on Be-bop-a-lula, Vincent's biggest hit.

A series of live albums and then the odd recent release in which he plays an opera tune, Somewhere Over the Rainbow, and I Put a Spell on You. Let's not forget covering Jeff Buckley (not cool according to overters). While everyone was expecting a guitar showcase album, he put out an odd, eclectic piece.

He wears sunglasses and a sleeveless leather vest (which may be even cooler than a leather jacket). He has a mullet.

He is a 2x Rock and Roll HOF inductee, yet he plays at 2,000 seat theaters. Everyone today acknowledges, it seems, that he is THE guitarist of our era, another crazy shift in thinking by the media/critics.

There are over-rated guitarists, and clearly, Clapton heads that field. There are annoying guitarists that (like you said) are soulless and nothing without pedals. Jeff, however, is so odd in terms of career and talent and thinking that he really needs special consideration. Is there a greater irritation to fans than NOT playing music and working on cars?

Written off dead, written off as just a guitar noodler (err, even by talented authors), he is truly ahead of me, you, and I think, everyone. I still can't figure out the techno albums and I am putting them on as we speak in an advanced state of mind. Maybe I can figure out what his last release is all about (Emotion and Commotion).

Annoying Critics' Tricks: NY Times Review of Stephen Hawking's “The Grand Design”

2010-09-08T09:19:00.000-04:00

I wrote a while ago about the annoying habit some critics have of saying that a work of art would have been better had the writer/singer/director/etc. had only changed it in a way that the critic approves of. In other words, "I would have liked it more if it were more like I like it." In his NY Times review of Stephen Hawking's "The Grand Design," Dwight Garner uses another trick critics use that I think is unfair. He writes:

The real news about “The Grand Design,” however, isn’t Mr. Hawking’s supposed jettisoning of God, information that will surprise no one who has followed his work closely. The real news about “The Grand Design” is how disappointingly tinny and inelegant it is. The spare and earnest voice that Mr. Hawking employed with such appeal in “A Brief History of Time” has been replaced here by one that is alternately condescending, as if he were Mr. Rogers explaining rain clouds to toddlers, and impenetrable.

“The Grand Design” is packed with grating yuks. “If you think it is hard to get humans to follow traffic laws,” we read, “imagine convincing an asteroid to move along an ellipse.” (Oh, my.)

What I find unfair is that he says the book is "packed with grating yuks" and then gives us one example that isn't particularly grating. I find his commentary, "oh, my" (don't leave out that comma, smart guy!) much more grating than the joke itself. I understand that the there is limited room in the review for other examples, but if you are going to assert that something is "packed" with something awful you need to provide more evidence for the reader. Otherwise leave out the assertion.

Labor Day Special: My Role in the Jobless Recovery

2010-09-06T14:05:00.000-04:00

I have long believed that it takes only one jerk to ruin something for everybody: the cigar smoker in a bar, the neighbor who lets his dogs bark all night, the hacker who sends out a computer virus, and so on. So it came as no surprise to me to find out that the current "jobless recovery" is the fault of just one jerk. But it was a bit of a shock to find out that the jerk is me.

Paul Krugman, professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University and op-ed columnist for the New York Times, was the first person to recognize that our economy's frustratingly weak job market could be attributable to my being a jerk. "He [me] is almost impossible to reach because his apartment is in a cell-phone dead zone, and he refuses to get a land line" Mr. Krugman opined. "This alone," he added, "has cost 10,000 manufacturing jobs in the Midwest."

Almost immediately after that editorial hit the stands, the press ran with the story. James K. Galbraith wrote, "He [me] is such a know-it-all…15,000 textile jobs gone." The Economist ran an article detailing how my insistence that the Beatles are underrated led to the loss of 67,000 jobs in the steel industry. And USA Today ran a pie chart showing that my habit of correcting people's grammar was the single biggest obstacle to job creation.

And it wasn't just the press: Greg Mankiw, the former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said, "I'm on record as stating offshore outsourcing is a 'good thing' and 'just a new way to do international trade.' But for that to be true, he [me] needs to stop monopolizing conversations at dinner parties. Then the positive effects of outsourcing could be seen." Former Treasury Secretary O'Neill said in an interview that even though President Obama is not doing everything that could be done, "things would not be so bad if he [me] would pay for dinner just once."

I can't quite figure out how I'm having such a big effect on the jobs market, but these people know a lot more about economics than I do, so I'm just going to have to take their word for it that I'm the jerk.

I sincerely apologize, Happy Labor Day.

Advanced Genius Theory: Hearts and Minds

2010-09-03T17:10:00.000-04:00

Here is a nice example of someone embracing Advancement and finding some good stuff out there he might have missed otherwise:

More than any other contained period, Summer 2010 has been a musical exploratory explosion for me on a personal level. So much wonderful music abounds in the wings and unforeseen sharp corners. I do give credit where credit is due, so I'll admit that part of that is from having a roommate with good music taste. I have to give credit to Jason Hartley for his wonderful book "Advanced Genius Theory," which explores music made by stars that most people perceive as crap. (Lou Reed and Bob Dylan's careers during the eighties.) Anyway, in a nutshell the book says to take all music on a positive level from the beginning. Find what is good about it before you focus entirely on the bad. It's a wholly optimistic way of looking at music.

So this summer I started to open my mind to the fact that there is more out there than the handful of bands I couldn't go without. The songs on this week's playlist are reflections of that. They're the wonderful discoveries that eased the stress of a high-drama filled summer. For some people, music is the noise in their lives backgrounds. For me, music is my life's soundtrack. Occasionally bitter, often sweet, it's honest, true, and sounds fantastic. Summer 2010, I bid you adieu. It was entirely unique and special, and now that it's over, I have these songs to remember it by.

Go here to see what songs he's talking about.

“On the Inevitable Decline...” : The New Yorker

2010-09-01T10:31:00.000-04:00

“On the Inevitable Decline...” : The New Yorker

Title: On The Inevitable Decline Into Mediocrity of the Popular Musician Who Attains a Comfortable Middle Age

Poem: O Sting, where is thy death?

Remember that your poetry is not good enough for the New Yorker. Also, this is so Overt I can hardly stand it.

Soundcheck: The Advanced Genius Theory - WNYC

2010-08-27T15:35:00.001-04:00

Soundcheck: The Advanced Genius Theory - WNYC

Audio is available now...

Soundcheck: Advancing a new theory of genius - WNYC

2010-08-27T10:44:00.000-04:00

Soundcheck: Advancing a new theory of genius - WNYC

Why Eric Clapton Is Like Keanu Reeves in The Matrix

2010-08-25T16:11:00.000-04:00

An excerpt from Advanced Genius Theory:

I want to like Eric Clapton, I really do. He seems to be the ideal candidate for Advancement—aging rock'n'roller, sold out by doing beer commercial, participated in a Cream reunion—but I think he's just authentically terrible. I know that some people, people I respect, revere him, but I find his style of guitar playing incredibly boring. And his songwriting is truly dreadful. The obvious examples are "Tears From Heaven" and "You Look Wonderful Tonight," neither of which I can sit through from beginning to end. Don't even get me started with his idiotic nickname, Slow Hand. I think the biggest reason I can’t get on board with him is that he is so devoted to the blues, which I also really can't stand. (Again, my fault.) I say he's devoted because he says it, not because there is much evidence that it's true, at least post-Unplugged. That aside, the kind of blues he worships is particularly irritating to me. If there is anything more predictable, it's straightforward electric Buddy Guy-style blues, especially played by a chinless, wife-stealing British white guy. At the very least he could have emulated Robert Johnson, whose style was genuinely strange. Of course, Johnson is the most Overt of all possible blues influences.

As usual, I'm perfectly willing to accept the fact that I'm probably the idiot here. Clapton was in the Yardbirds, a decent band, but he quit them for his Overt love of the blues. Pretty tedious, but at least there was a principle involved that he could later betray. Cream was in fact a pretty good betrayal of those principles, and they rocked pretty hard at that. If there were an argument to be made inside my head for the Advancement of Eric Clapton, it would have to be his involvement with Cream. It was one project that he didn't ruin by his presence, kind of like how people loved The Matrix because Keanu Reeves wasn't all that terrible in it. Clapton, then, was the Reeves to Ginger Baker and Jack Bruce's Lawrance Fishburne and Carrie-Ann Moss. Just as Reeves was needed in The Matrix to play a character in permanent "whoa!" mode, Clapton was necessary to keep Cream grounded. Without his wah-wah solos, "Tales of Brave Ulysses" could have wound up sounding ridiculous, and that's a possibility I'd prefer not to contemplate.

Everything after Cream has been awful as far as I can tell. There wasn't even a "Dream of the Blue Turtles" for me to look to as proof that he could achieve something as a solo artist. Even still, I'm leaving the door open for someone to prove me wrong about him. It's possible that, like Sting, he is just beyond my comprehension. He could have lapped boring into being interesting. I do find it somewhat compelling that he has gone preppy in the last few years, wearing khakis and short-sleeve cotton shirts on stage instead of the suits he wore there for a while. He's chosen a look that reminds me of what a retired man who has given up suits would wear to a nice restaurant. It's strange, yes, but not Advanced. If he shows up in leathers for the next Cream reunion, then I'll be ready to change my mind.

Paul McCartney, Lou Reed, and Egg Rolls

2010-08-24T13:31:00.000-04:00

From showbiz411:

While most New Yorkers spend the last few days of summer wondering what we did to anger the weather gods, the A list plays on.

It does turn out that Hamptons celebrities like pricey Chinese food–that’s the kind where you don’t have to say, Hold the MSG. (To rock stars, MSG means Madison Square Garden anyway).

As with its city counterpart, Phillippe Chow in East Hampton is a hit. Paul McCartney was there the other night, and so was NFL star Marcus Allen. (No one asked him about Nicole Simpson, I’m sure.) Lou Reed was also there, and brought a little dog to dine al fresco.

You scream, I scream, we all want egg rolls.

Reader Friedrich Nietzsche Weighs In

2010-08-22T15:28:00.000-04:00

Got another interesting note from a reader of the blog and my book. His name is Frederick Nietzsche, and he has some good stuff to say about why the Advanced State of Mind is so powerful:

Whoever wants really to get to know something new (be it a person, an event, or a book) does well to take up this new thing with all possible love, to avert his eye quickly from, even to forget, everything about it that he finds inimical, objectionable, or false. So, for example, we give the author of a book the greatest possible head start, and, as if at a race, virtually yearn with a pounding heart for him to reach his goal. By doing this, we penetrate into the heart of the new thing, into its motive center: and this is what it means to get to know it. Once we have got that far, reason then sets its limits; that overestimation, that occasional unhinging of the critical pendulum, was just a device to entice the soul of a matter out into the open.

Nicely, put Friedrich! That's super, man.

Keep the emails coming...

Steve Miller to Teach at USC

2010-08-20T08:58:00.000-04:00

And here's a bit of the story for the NY Times:

On Thursday, the university’s Thornton School of Music said that Mr. Miller, the guitarist and front man of the Steve Miller Band, will serve as an artist in residence starting in the current term. In that capacity, he will present master classes for undergraduates enrolled in its popular-music and music-industry programs, and lead seminars on tour planning and record production as well as workshops on more specific topics like guitar tone. (Dude, ask him how he got that wah-wah sound on “The Joker”!)

“Every time he comes into contact with students, he just comes away energized and wants to work with them on more of a sustained basis,” Chris Sampson, associate dean of the Thornton School, said in a telephone interview. “I just thought, well, let’s make this happen. Let’s find an outlet and an avenue to get you involved.”

Mr. Sampson said Mr. Miller has been connected to U.S.C. for several years, as a guest artist who worked with the school’s jazz studies students and helped them create arrangements of his songs, and as a guest speaker in Mr. Sampson’s songwriting class. More recently, Mr. Sampson said, Mr. Miller consulted on the Thornton School’s curriculum for its two-year-old popular-music program, which now enrolls 55 students.

Mr. Miller is expected to be on campus at least twice a semester, following a schedule similar to the Thornton School’s other artists in residence, Patrice Rushen, the pianist and singer, and Lamont Dozier, the songwriter and producer.

“What we’ve agreed upon,” Mr. Sampson said, “is that any time he is in Los Angeles, he will just add an extra day, and he will make that his U.S.C. day, and we will build out a full day of activities for him.”
This should soften the blow of having those victories from the Reggie Bush years erased.

What Happened to Bob Dylan? 60 Minutes Interview

2010-08-19T16:55:00.002-04:00

Watch this on YouTube then watch the whole interview.

See Bob Dylan: Cash Only

2010-08-19T12:39:00.000-04:00

This is interesting (LA Weekly):

Beloved Malibu entertainer Bob Dylan has just announced a show at the Warfield in San Francisco for August 25. Doors will open at 5:30 and the show is scheduled for 8 pm. Nothing really unusual about this, except that the show is CASH-ONLY and there will be no advance sales of tickets. It's unclear what made Bob join bad-neighborhood bodegas, "colorful" Italian restaurants, street vendors and others in the "Cash-only" lifestyle. Maybe it's a nod to the mega-recession and the calamitous loss of credit (and credit cards) that afflicts millions. Maybe he likes to get a big ole bag o'cash at the end of the night, like his beloved '30s minstrels (at $60 the ticket, he's gonna need a couple of suitcases).

I love it when people try to guess what Bob Dylan's thinking. It is truly one of the great pleasures of my life.

NHL Advanced? A Reader Makes the Case

2010-08-14T14:56:00.000-04:00

A reader named Jeffrey Benson wrote me a note asking whether the NHL might be Advanced. Actually, he wasn't so much asking as making his case. Here it is:

1. You Must Have Done Great Work For More Than 15 Years

The NHL has been around since 1917, and NHL teams play for the most historic and prestigious trophy in professional sports, the Stanley Cup.

2. You Must Have Alienated Your Original Fans

The Lockout of 2004 ...cancelling an entire season is literally the most alienating thing a sports league can ever do.

Coming back from the lockout with rule changes like the shootout, goalie trapezoid, and 4 on 4 OT that did not go over well, and still are not popular with old school, original hockey fans.

Losing ESPN and National TV contracts, going to "the Outdoor Life Network," now known as Versus, made it so fans couldn't even watch games if they wanted to...also pretty alienating.

3. You Must Be Completely Unironic

Two words: GARY BETTMAN

4. You Must Be Unpredictable.

As a sport - I think the NHL certainly qualifies as unpredictable. Constant upsets in the playoffs, random fighting, feuding, trading, season ending injuries, and over long periods of time, the NHL as a business has had a great deal of franchise-moving and expansion. Up-and-down surges in ratings and popularity (think the huge interest in hockey during the olympics) along with rule changes, equipment changes, and etc I think all help qualify the NHL as being somewhat unpredictable. Also, the random suspension process (some people getting suspending for headshots, some not, the whole Sean Avery suspension) also helps the case.

5. You Must Lose It. Spectacularly.

The "glowing puck" - remember this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoxTrax This might be the best example of a sport losing it ever.

The major expansion movement into "non traditional" hockey markets, specifically, Atlanta, and Nashville, having THREE teams in California, and two in Florida. Not to mention a team in Minnesota moving to Dallas, a team moving from Canada to Phoenix, and a team moving from Hartford to Carolina.

I think a major sport going from national broadcasting on channels like Fox, NBC, and ESPN to a network people have never heard of, called Versus, is certainly losing it....can you imagine if the NFL moved to the Oxygen network?

The inane CBA, that allowed crazy-long term frontloaded deals, until recently, the Devils signed 27-year Ilya Kovalchuck to a SEVENTEEN year deal, which the NHL then decided to reject even though it fit all the rules. A pretty good amount of the legal rules and issues could be used to further this argument, but those are a little more boring...

I reminded him about the high frequency of mullets among hockey players, and he added:

I can't believe I forgot the mullet....that and the whole complete disregard-for-front-teeth thing are clear examples of advancement.

The idea you had that got me thinking was the whole "perception" argument you make, which I feel backs up the NHL theory. The same way people can't understand later-day Lou Reed, Sting Wind-chimes albums, Geoge Lucas or Orsen Welles, and write them off due to low commercials sales, reviews, popularity, etc...its not because the art is bad, it's because it's advanced and beyond average consumer comprehension. Reminds me of the NHL always being mocked for low ratings and people not understanding the rules...it's not because the sport is bad, it's because it's advanced.

Also - I'm sure something about the old school NHL goalie mask turning into something worn by a famous movie serial killer can somehow be used to prove advancement.

Keep those emails coming!

One Last Response to Mark Athitakis: What Is the Role of Critics?

2010-08-13T09:24:00.000-04:00

I've thought a lot about the role of critics, probably more in the last few months because they have an influence on people who are considering whether to buy my book. I have something of a bias against most critics because I have known quite a few people who wrote record reviews. Most didn't really want to do it because either they were more interested in writing features or because they couldn't write what the truly felt. This meant they put the minimal amount of effort into it, which was evident in the reviews. I've also copyedited a lot of reviewers who clearly did not know what they were talking about, yet their ignorance was either unnoticed by the reader or hidden by an editor.

Another issue is that a critic who sits down to review something is very much like a student who has been assigned a book for the purpose of writing a paper. I'm not saying you can't enjoy an assigned book, but you do read it differently than someone who is reading for pleasure. If a critic has time to read for pleasure first and then read again as a critic, they can reduce the problem, but this is rare, I suspect. And anyway, they still know they are reading for the purpose of reviewing when they are reading for pleasure.

Finally, critics not only have to judge a work, they have to write about that judgment. This brings a level of artificiality because the critic has to create a narrative that will interest the reader. Maintaining the narrative can become more important than giving a true sense of the quality of a book or record. In other words, good writing sometimes beats out good criticism.

But there are critics who love what they do, have the time to do it, write well, and know what they are talking about. What is their role? Off the top of my head, I can think of three legitimate ways critics are valuable and conveniently they all start with "e":

Entertainment. It's enjoyable to read good writing about art by someone who is informed.
Education. The best critics are able to see things in art that many of us would otherwise miss. Reading them deepens are appreciation for art because they teach us new ways to think. We don't have to agree with them, we just have to be stimulated.
Empowerment. When a critic agrees with you, it makes you feel confident in your own ability to process art. If you are more confident in yourself, you enjoy things more.

Of course I've fallen into the critic's trap with my cute E series. I would probably have more things to write, but I can't think of any other valid things that start with "e." I'll have more to say about this topic later. But my final thought for now is that what a critic can't do is judge whether something is good or bad. Yes, it can be pointed out that a writer uses poor syntax or a song's tempo is unsteady, but there are plenty of great books with convoluted sentences and great songs with meandering beat. All the critic can do is to tell us whether they like the book or record they are reviewing. That opinion is valuable to readers only if they believe the critic either knows what they are talking about or if the critic's judgment often coincides with their own. In my case, I include the artist in the criticism continuum, and if the artist's judgment most often seems right to me (even if at first I don't agree), then I can be persuaded that my judgment may not be sound.

Largehearted Boy Playlist: Advanced Genius Theory

2010-08-11T13:57:00.000-04:00

Read it here. Here's a bit of what you'll be reading:

Jason Hartley's The Advanced Genius Theory puts forth an interesting hypothesis, that even though the true advanced geniuses in the arts may seem to eventually slip, it is our own critical response to their latter works that is lacking. Though I didn't agree with all his examples, I did enjoy the book from its first page to the last.

This is one of the year's most thought-provoking books about music and pop culture. Some will agree and others will disagree with this book's theories, but The Advanced Genius Theory is sure to spark debate and discussion.

In his own words, here is Jason Hartley's Book Notes music playlist for his book, The Advanced Genius Theory: Are They Out of Their Minds or Ahead of Their Time?:

About six years ago, Chuck Klosterman wrote an Esquire article that brought the Advanced Genius Theory out of my bedroom and into the larger world. Though I did a terrible job of explaining it to him, he managed to summarize the spirit of theory perfectly, writing, "When a genius does something that appears idiotic, it does not necessarily mean he suddenly sucks. What it might mean is that he's doing something you cannot understand, because he has Advanced beyond you." Hopefully the following list of songs will add to your understanding of the theory, and you will then start on a journey of self-discovery that is Advancement.

The songs I chose are:

Original Wrapper (Lou Reed)
Jokerman (Bod Dylan, Late Night version)
If I Can Dream (Elvis)
Time After Time (Miles Davis version)
Interstellar Overdrive (CVB version)
All For Love (Sting, Bryan Adams, Rod Stewart)
When Love Comes to Town (U2 and BB King)
Third Uncle (Brian Eno)
Take Me Home (Phil Collins)

Another Response to Mark Athitakis: Part Two

2010-08-10T09:15:00.000-04:00

So let's answer another part of the question I asked in the first part of my response to Mark Athitakis: why go through the torture of listening to music you don’t like so you can eventually like it?

It is not to prove anyone wrong, as in his example of Bob Dylan's Christian albums or to avoid appearing “stuffy,” “tweedy,” “unimaginative,” or “smug.” I think these are examples of why a critic might embrace questionable music by otherwise great musicians, but the benefits are really for regular people. I can speak from experience that once you embrace Advanced music you will discover great things that you would not have otherwise. Having a negative reaction to music is certainly valid, but I do think it's worthwhile to question why you had the negative (or positive) reaction. I've merely laid out some alternatives to the accepted idea that most artists lose it when they're old.

Mark (I believe we can use first names now) wrote in the comment section that Levon Helm's cover of "Long Black Veil" did not have an emotional impact on him regardless of Helm's intentions. He argues further that his opinion is still valid even if others, or everyone, have a different opinion. We're in total agreement here. Where we diverge a bit is that I'm giving a certain extra weight to Helm's opinion because I believe he is wiser than I am. He is essentially a critic of his own music; he chooses what to play and how to play it, and if his band can't do a good job on a song, it doesn't make it into the set. So by virtue of playing the song for an audience, Helm is showing that he's giving the song at least one thumb up, if not two. If we look at the artist as self critic, then it makes perfect sense to compare his opinion to other critics. Few would argue with me that a review by Edmund Wilson is likely more valuable than one by, say, me. I just think of Helm as part of the chain of people evaluating his music. Since he knows his stuff, I'm inclined to think that there is something I'm missing. He isn't infallible, but neither am I.

This leads me to one last thought: I didn't like Exile on Main Street until three weeks ago. If I look at technically, I can say it is a jumbled mess of tired blues licks by a bunch of rich British guys pretending to be poor black Americans. As much as they complained about the lack of tea in France, they were there because they wanted to be rich. Plus they were criminally negligent in their treatment of their children. For most of my life, I have never liked the blues because my idols stayed away from that style of music. I didn't like solos, the same chord progression over and over, the self-pitying lyrics, etc. Now, with more experience and hopefully wisdom, I realize that I was just being stupid and Exile on Main Street incredibly good. Mark authentically did not like the cover of "Long Black Veil" but that doesn't mean he wouldn't like it 15 years later. My hope is that people will use the Advanced Genius Theory to revisit some things they have dismissed and/or never tried.

I have one more thing to address: What is the role of critics? Should they even exist? That's for part three.

Another Response to Mark Athitakis: Part One

2010-08-09T15:08:00.001-04:00

Mark Athitakis, my worthy adversary, has written some more about Advancement and my responses to his earlier post. He makes a number of great and challenging points that I would like to address. So let’s get started:

Athitakis went to the Newport Folk Festival recently, where he saw Levon Helm and his band (not The Band). He was troubled by their cover of “Long Black Veil,” about which he wrote, “There was nothing especially bad about it, but nothing especially good about it either.” He goes on to note that he isn’t required to like this version just because Helm is who he is, but that he shouldn’t reject it out of hand just because it’s slower than he might like or that the song choice is a cliché. Though he tried to like it, he found the experience not worth the effort because it gave him “no particular pleasure.” Finally he asks what, exactly, is the point of trying to find the good in something that he truly doesn’t like, giving two examples: 1)To prove that critics had it all wrong about Bob Dylan‘s Christian records? 2) To not appear “stuffy,” “tweedy,” “unimaginative,” “smug,” or any of the other adjectives people use when a critic dislikes something other people enjoy?

I want to start out by saying that it’s clear that Athitakis has made an honest effort to approach music with an open mind, or perhaps a mind rerouted toward Advancement (I concede that there is a distinction). But I’m not surprised he failed to enjoy Helm’s performance, if for no other reason than I believe that Helm isn’t Advanced. A cool guy, but not Advanced. However in my book, I claim that once you approach things with an Advanced state of mind, you can like anything, even if it isn’t up to genius standards. So let’s ask what is the value of reaching that state of mind in the context of this particular performance of “Long Black Veil.”

The song has been covered by just about everyone, including Nazareth, but I’m not sure why this should count against Helm. The song might have achieved cliché status, but that doesn’t mean it’s a bad song or that it is necessarily a bad choice to cover it. And I would bet that some people in the audience were exposed to that song for the first time or at least had their interest in the song renewed. To expand out a bit, the festival itself is a cliché and Athitakis went to see it because it has some cultural value. I’m sure there are purists who would deride the current version of the festival and argue that it is no longer relevant. But that doesn’t mean the choice to continue the festival for those who are interested in it is a bad thing necessarily. The question is whether this version of the festival is good, and so it goes with the cover of “Long Black Veil.”

Aside from the idea that the song is overdone, Athiakis notes that it was done too slowly. This is the kind of judgment that is impossible to prove. Tempo was likely not the problem, but the performance within that tempo. Any song can be played at any speed as long as the musicians can find a groove that satisfies the listener’s particular needs. Which leads us to the question of how everyone else felt about the tempo. Some people are more inclined to slower music, and I would guess that many people in the audience loved it. Are they incorrect in their judgment? And Levon Helm knows just about everything there is to know about that style of music, and yet he chose that tempo (presumably, given that he is the drummer and it’s his band). Why would he make this error? If you’ve followed this blog or read my book, you’ll know that I think that there is no obvious right or wrong when it comes to art, and of course this is not a new thought. But I’ve added on a piece which is, if the choice is among me, other people, and a musician who has been playing music for 50 years, then I’m better off siding with the guy with the 50 years experience. If there is such a thing as right and wrong, then he’s probably right.

Okay, but why go through the torture of listening to music you don’t like so you can eventually like it? Coming in part two…

Advanced Genius Theory Pretentious?

2010-08-07T16:35:00.001-04:00

One thing I hear from time to time is that the Advanced Genius Theory is pretentious. I really don't understand why, exactly. It's true that I tried to construct a logical argument to prove that there is merit to Advancement, but I don't use big words or many highfalutin arguments ("highfalutin" sounds too much like "rootin' tootin' to be pretentious), so I would have thought I'd be in the clear. I do mention some brainy folks to support my argument, but just as often I quote guys like Powers Boothe. My favorite instance of pretentiousness is my acceptance of Jar-Jar Binks rather than declaring him a CGI rendering of the death of George Lucas's credibility. I compare him to Chewbacca, not Othello. Perhaps the issue is not that I'm pretending to be smart but that I'm pretending to be dumb? Or maybe that I'm saying that being dumb is actually smart? Of course, I'm not doing either of those things, I'm just guessing.

Mesa just no get it.

The New Yorker Review of "Get Low": Make It Like I Would Have!

2010-08-05T08:51:00.001-04:00

I've not yet seen Get Low, so I can't say if the New Yorker review is fair or unfair. However, there is one part that I completely reject:

The funeral is a lively affair, yet it signals the demise of the movie. There is a carnival air, with food being grilled and fiddle music played, but Felix, largely in closeup, takes the microphone and confesses to an ancient sin. He is wholly in earnest, of course, no more likely to fool us than if he were sitting on Oprah’s sofa. Had I been in that crowd, I would have been tempted to shout, Don’t tell us, old man! Keep your mystery, and your land, to yourself! Duvall could have done it; imagine him bending down to whisper his guilt into Spacek’s ear, with Murray close by, eavesdropping, and the rest of us shut out. Or imagine if Felix had died beforehand, leaving his baffled mourners to do the whispering. “Get Low” is deftly played, and it rarely mislays its ambling charm, but what a forbidding fable it could have been if the truth about Felix Bush, rather than emerging into sunlight, had slunk back into the woods.

This form of criticism--the movie would have been better had they made the movie I would have made--is common, but totally invalid. It's not very surprising that a critic thinks he would like the movie he made better than the one somebody else made. This is especially true when the critic doesn't actually have to make it. Comparing an ideal to something that exists is not a fair fight. So let's stick with critiquing what was actually filmed rather than what might have been filmed, shall we?

Paul Westerberg Advanced?

2010-07-31T14:58:00.000-04:00

A reader (Tom) sent me a note this morning, and I thought I'd share the exchange...

Tom: [Westerberg] Advanced or not? Former slop-rocker does kids movie soundtrack (Open Season) which is probably one of his best solo albums, and has a guitar made by First Act sold at Walmarts. Also Lou's concert for dogs was one of the most advanced acts by an artist. If he releases a CD, that is inaudible to humans, made for dogs, I will rejoice.

Me: Great stuff about Westerberg. I didn't love the Replacements, but enough of my friends do to make PW qualified. I didn't know about the Wal-Mart deal, but obviously that is awesome.

As far as the dog album goes, a release on CD would be one-upping Cage because Reed's actually has sound that you can't hear, whereas Cage simply "created" nothing, which is just the opposite of something.

Keep the emails coming!

Ben Allen on the Advanced Genius Theory: Interview

2010-07-29T13:19:00.000-04:00

Had a great conversation with a guy named Ben Allen, who has known about the theory for a while and was kind enough to get me a little press. Read the bit below, then see the whole thing here so the picture of the blue elephant makes sense.

Ever wondered how Lou Reed could release a double album of nothing but guitar noise and feedback and still have it advance his career? “What the hell was Bob Dylan thinking doing a television spot for Victoria's Secret?” Or, “what would motivate Brian Wilson to release a rap song entitled ‘Smart Girls’ in the late 80’s?”

Your immediate reaction might be something like "most artists occasionally create work that sucks, and don't always make the best decisions." I too, felt this way for many years.

Now what would you say if I told you there was a theory that would allow you to appreciate all of the work by your favorite artists? Twenty years ago, Jason Hartley came up with one.

In 1990, he and a friend developed The Theory while dining at a Pizza Hut. Although he has been writing and talking about it for years, he gained an increased level of exposure when Chuck Klosterman published an article attempting to explain The Theory in Esquire Magazine in 2004.

Recently, Simon & Schuster published Hartley's first book, The Advanced Genius Theory: Are They Out of Their Minds or Ahead of Their Time? I spoke with Hartley to help explain further what all this means and if The Theory is for real.

Advanced, ManNadaMucho.com: See if you can explain Advancement Theory in 30 words or less. Go.
Jason Hartley: There are certain artists who are so good, for so long, that it is foolish to dismiss them, no matter how out of touch, ridiculous, or crazy they may seem.

NM: That was exactly 30 words, nice work!
JH: I’ve been talking about it for almost 20 years, so I’ve had a lot of practice.

NM: Don't you think it's possible that even geniuses create subpar work on occasion? What about when they retrospectively declare their previous efforts as "garbage?"
JH: First of all, never trust a genius, especially an Advanced Genius, when they talk about themselves. Not only do they lie all the time, they also judge from their own Advanced perspective. That’s why they talk disparagingly about their work (except for their latest work, which they inevitably describe as the best they’ve ever done).

Answering the first half of your question second, yes, it is possible for geniuses to create subpar work. But “subpar work” by Advanced Geniuses is more interesting than other artists’ well-received output. Of course, the trick is identifying when an Advanced Artist does actual subpar work. But that’s hard because we are so behind them in terms of our ability to understand their work. Ten years ago, no one would have argued with you if you said that Lou Reed’s Metal Machine Music was worthless, but now people are starting to get the hang of what he was doing. So maybe the Advanced never do subpar work. I guess the point is that I don’t think many of us are in a position to judge.

NM: Isn’t a little pretentious to explain music being brilliant just because the general public isn’t smart enough to understand it?
JH: Only slightly less pretentious than dismissing an album by Bob Dylan.

One confession: I sort of cheated on the 30-word bit.

A Response to Mark Athitakis: Part Two

2010-07-27T16:38:00.000-04:00

Mark Athitakis wrote about his relationship with the Advanced Genius Theory, and I'm responding in bits and pieces. Here is part two. (Read part one)

From the post:

[Hartley] writes in the book’s conclusion: “Once you have achieved the Advanced state of mind, something amazing happens: you start to like everything.” He’s not arguing against discernment: “You can still have ‘good taste,’” he writes. “It’s just that the question becomes how much you like a work of art rather than whether you like it.” It’s a powerful counter against critics who come up with contrived reasons to dismiss things. But how much better is it to come up with contrived reasons to like them?

A fair question, albeit one I think might be his duty, as a critic, to answer. My take, though, is that it is far, far better to come up with contrived reasons to like something than to dislike them because liking things is more pleasurable. (In a pure sense of the term, rather than the pleasure one gets from being miserable.) However, I’m not asking people to make up reasons to like the later work of Advanced Artists. I do write that if you need to trick yourself into liking Advance art by pretending to like it, that is fine, because eventually if the work is truly Advanced you’ll discover its real greatness. I started out laughing at Lou Reed’s later work, and ended up sincerely loving it. The fact that I thought it was funny at one time doesn’t diminish my eventual appreciation for it. I just needed a way in.

Another point is that I don’t think it is a contrivance to say that an artist’s full body of work can tell us something of the quality of that artist’s latest work. Or at least it’s no more of a contrivance than other ways to judge quality of a work of art. It seems to be perfectly acceptable for critics to talk about an artist’s “relevance,” which is really a measure of the audience’s reaction to a work rather than the work itself. Between judging a recent work of art based on an artist’s history versus that work’s relevance, I think the former is less of a contrivance. But you could easily say the opposite, and there would be no way for me to argue because ultimately we are talking about art. There’s just no formula for what is good, which leads me to two final thoughts:

If I say a song is good, then that probably means that it meets a certain set of conditions. But there are songs that I like that don’t appear to meet any of those conditions. These are often called guilty pleasures. It may be the guilt is what I like, but I don’t feel guilty about them in private, just around others. Anyway, if I like something that violates my rules for goodness, that means that the rules are flexible, which means I can’t always count on them to guide me in the right direction. The second, related thought is that some songs I don’t like at first I eventually like after something has changed. Usually the reason is that someone I respect tells me I should listen to it again, but there are lots of other external factors. The whole point of the Advanced Genius Theory is that you should take a chance on some things you might have missed. I encourage you to look everywhere, but the best bets are those artists that you at one time loved but for whatever reason you stopped.

So going back to the original question, “How much better it to come up with contrived reasons to like [Advanced Artists]?” As long as it allows you to discover new things, then much better. When you say yes to something there are endless possibilities, but when you say no, then that’s the end.

I Didn't Write What I Know

2010-07-27T09:13:00.000-04:00

We had been waiting on the launch pad for about three hours when the phone rang. It was Mission Control. "The guys at IT think there might be a problem with the navigation coordinates, so you might as well eat your hamburgers now." The burgers were a little cold and the bun was soggy, but no one complained. "I'll make it up to you guys when we get into orbit," I said, as I opened the pickle jar. My crew and I had been through a lot together, starting with our sorties over the DMZ. You don’t get hamburgers—soggy or otherwise—when you’re out fighting Migs over the Pyongang desert.

In addition to my usual crew was a new guy named Olaf. He was a Dane who stood about six feet eight and went about 300 pounds. Olaf was as strong as the rest of us put together, and he was going to need every ounce of that strength for his part of the mission. We were taking our rocket ride to fix a satellite that had gone out of orbit, and he was going to have to haul it into the capsule so we could adjust the transponders. Of course they weren’t going to tell us what the satellite was for, but we all knew it wasn’t so you could get ESPN Deportes in Tuscaloosa. We also knew that Olaf was going to be doing some serious heavy lifting out there.

It took a while for Olaf to fit in, which is only natural. Me and the guys had been together in the trenches—literally—and you can’t help but bond when your tin rations run out, you’re waist-deep in God knows what kind of filth, and Jerry is pointing his .22 at you fifteen away across No Man’s Land. Jerry, our Jerry I mean, Jerry Rodriguez from San Antonio, that is, even took Olaf for a spy. “I no trust his accent,” he said to me at the NASA bar with the honesty that comes from one cerveza too many. But I think he just wanted to prove to the guys that he was as American as the rest of us, even though his father and father’s father was on the wrong side of the Alamo. Funny thing is Olaf thought Jerry was a spy, too, which he confessed to me over some Danish rum his mum had mailed him. Everything worked out okay, though. Jerry and Olaf got to be best of friends because they both loved Tom Clancy novels and suffered from mild schizophrenia that they covered up during their psych evaluation by pretending to be each other.

“Damn, captain, are they going to light this candle or not?” Chuck grumbled from the backseat. He was always in a hurry to get wherever he was going, which was funny because he was a doctor before he got drafted. “For a doctor, you sure don’t have any patience!” Harold joked for the millionth time, and we laughed not at the joke itself but the absurdity of its repetition. Plus, Harold and Chuck were lovers, which added a depth to the joke that only a military man can appreciate.

I called up the tower and said, “You’ve got five guys up here who are ready to get on with this mission. I don’t care if I have to steer this thing with a rudder, let’s launch.” Sometimes you had to kick those eggheads in the ass to get them to do anything. “No can do,” shot back Carol, exhaling her cigarette as she spoke like Marlene Dietrich. Now, if she was an egghead, she was a Faberge. (I was big into collecting those at the time.) Some of the guys didn’t like Carol because she was so pretty and was sleeping with Rodriguez. But she was top-notch in the control tower, and that’s all I cared about. Besides this was NASA, where everybody slept with everybody. We used to joke that the initials stood for National Aeronautics and a whole lot of interagency Sex Agency. That’s before the Moral Majority got interested in the space program.

“Roger that, Carol,” I said, knowing that if we weren’t lifting off now, we probably were going to be spending the night aboard the capsule because it was going to be dark in about 20 minutes. But just as I was ready to give up hope, the status light turned from red to green. I looked at Jerry, who knew all about the navigation systems, but he just shrugged. “What happened down there? We’ve got a ‘Go’ sign here,” I said to Carol. “Yeah, we’re not sure what happened,” she responded. “But the problem seems to have corrected itself. We’re going to start the countdown in a T-minus 30 seconds.” I looked around at my crew, who were busy putting away the condiments with the kind of no-nonsense professionalism that comes only with years of experience, and thought to myself with pride, “Yeah, the New Kids on the Block hit the nail right on the head.”

And the countdown began: 100, 99, 98, 97…

A Response to Mark Athitakis: Part One

2010-07-25T16:03:00.000-04:00

Mark Athitakis, who has a well-respected literary blog, wrote a fascinating post about the Advanced Genius Theory. He wrote some very kind words about the book, especially with regard to my sense of humor. I intend to trot out some of his quotes the next time my wife rolls her eyes at one of my jokes. Anyway, Athitakis has had a long history with the theory, going from annoyed to curious to downright respectful. But I haven't won him over yet; he still has issues with the theory and lays them out very tidily on his blog. I thought I would spend a little time answering some of his criticisms, not to prove him wrong, but merely to engage in the type of conversation the book was supposed to inspire. Today, I'm writing to address his observation that my critiques of single works of art (rather than a body of work) is unsatisfying:

The problem with Advancement—and the reason why it’s easy to regard it as a parlor game, if not an outright prank—is that its scope is limited. The theory only applies to artists who have a proven history of unquestioned brilliance (15 years, Hartley suggests), so the theory tends to get caught up in details about whether a musician’s acquisition of sunglasses and “world beat” musicians signifies Advancement or not. (Yanni would be the ultimate Advanced musician, I suspect, were he ever any good.) Another limitation is that Advancement mainly considers careers, not individual works—or at least doesn’t consider individual works in any interesting way. (They’re always better than you think! Because an Advanced artist made them!) Hartley is never more flat-footed as a writer then when he writes about a particular album; when he considers Dylan’s album Shot of Love, he lapses into the kind of fanboy fawning fit for a message board. (“The second song, ‘Heart of Mine,’ is a lovely, piano-heavy tune that shows off Dylan’s ability to sing in a conventional style when called upon to do so….”)

To this I say, well, a few things. First, there was a lot of ground to cover in the book, so I made the decision not to get too deep into particular works. I could write a book about Shot of Love, but I chose instead to address just the idea that he "can't sing" because that is a major hurdle for many listeners. It might be better to say that my purpose was not so much to explain why you should enjoy certain Advanced music but, rather, to convince you that it is possible to enjoy it. As for fanboy fawning, if truly feeling that "Heart of Mine" is lovely constitutes fanboy fawning (or just bad music criticism), then I'm guilty. But I wanted to write like a fan rather than a critic because I hoped that my sincere enthusiasm would inspire people to give Dylan and other Advanced artists another shot.

It seems that Athitakis's primary complaint with the book/theory is that I'm not fulfilling the role of critic adequately. He mentions in his post that I am averse to criticism and I'm suggesting that others should be as well. I'm not saying that, or not exactly that. I'm just trying to put criticism into some sort of context. What does it mean if Kurt Loder doesn't like a Bob Dylan song, but I do? Am I wrong? Is he? Is it possible that we're both right (or wrong)? In the process of trying to answer this, it seems valid to me to look at Dylan's body of work and, especially, the contemporary reaction (critical and popular) to his separate works. My position is that Dylan is right more often than he is wrong, so I give him the benefit of the doubt. I would like to say that it is possible to judge a work by itself, but I don't think it is.

I have more to say about all this, but I wanted to get some thoughts down while they are fresh.

Who Really Typed Shakespeare: Bingo or Pancakes?

2010-07-23T09:08:00.001-04:00

On April 23, 1915, Dr. Ravel Giancarlo set out to prove that if you gave enough monkeys enough time and enough typewriters, one of them would eventually reproduce the complete works of William Shakespeare. He got the idea from a book by Émile Borel, who used metaphorical monkeys to illustrate the stability of the laws of statistical mechanics. Inspired by this "infinite monkey theorem," Giancarlo rounded up fifty actual monkeys, chained them to fifty typewriters, and locked the doors. In the fall of 1948 Bingo, the first monkey that was recruited for the project, pulled from the carriage of his typewriter the final scene from The Tempest, vindicating Dr. Giancarlo, who had been ostracized from the scientific community. Giancarlo had always maintained that one of his monkeys would prove the theorem, so it was not a surprise to him that the experiment met with success. However, he was astonished that success came so quickly—and by a monkey with such humble beginnings.

Bingo's unlikely story began in the 1890s at Glover's Animal Preserve in Warwickshire, where he received the standard monkey education of the day. Most of his time would have been spent memorizing portions of Lily's Cercopithecus Latina as well as attending church. After Warwickshire, there is a gap in the timeline of nearly ten years, commonly known as the "lost years." Some scholars believe that Bingo might have been the same monkey—alternately referred to as "Bongo" and "Banjo"—who was rumored to live in the household of the wealthy Huffman family near Lancashire around the turn of the twentieth century. Details about Bongo or Banjo are murky because at the time monkey ownership was frowned on by the Anglican Church, so the Huffmans would have had to keep their monkey as secret as possible. Though we'll probably never know for sure if the Huffman monkey was indeed Bingo, it is nearly certain that near the end of these lost years he attached himself with a small circus, probably Lord Strange's Monkeys, which would have taken him to London.

It was shortly after he arrived in the city that Bingo was sold to Dr. Giancarlo. For the next thirty-three years Bingo typed away, starting with the sonnets, moving into the comedies and histories, and, finally, the tragedies, just as Shakespeare had done. His pace was remarkable from the beginning: While other monkeys were struggling with the stage directions of Titus Andronicus, Bingo was putting the finishing touches on Hamlet's famous "To be, or not to be" speech. After Bingo was finished with Shakespeare, he rejected Dr. Giancarlo's offer to give Faulkner or Joyce a try, and decided to put away his typewriter for good. He retired to Warwickshire, where he died a few years later as the most celebrated monkey typist of all time. But his legacy would not be left to rest in peace.

In the 1960s, some scholars asserted that Bingo (the "upstart monkey" in the words of one of his contemporaries) hadn't actually typed the plays and that a much more likely candidate was Marshmallows, who was also a part of Dr. Giancarlo's project. They believed that Bingo, having merely attended the King's New Monkey School back at Warwickshire, would not have had the education to randomly type Shakespeare. Marshmallows, on the other hand, was a celebrated monkey typist who had been to university at Cambridge as part of a number of lab experiments, so it was argued that he would have been exposed to a wide range of science, history, and literature. However, the Marshmallows theory was disproved definitively in 1968, when it was discovered that he had been killed in a brawl over a bunch of bananas before the typing of Romeo and Juliet. The Marshmallows theory was replaced soon thereafter by a group who posited that it must have been Sir Francis Bacon who typed the plays. This theory, too, was shot down easily, as it was revealed that the "monkey" Sir Francis Bacon was not even a part of Dr. Giancarlo's experiment, having died a few hundred years before it began. It was also discovered that Bacon was in fact a human being famous for works such as Essays, Colours of Good and Evil, and the Meditationes Sacrae. Amazingly, there are still some Baconists who cling to the idea that their man was the monkey that typed Shakespeare.

Since then there have been several theories proposing alternatives to Bingo. Indeed, for the last thirty years a veritable cottage industry in the publishing world has grown out of the question, "Which monkey really typed Shakespeare?" The latest offering is from Rubin James and Brenda Williams, who have written a new book, The Real Monkey Shakespeare: Bingo Was Not His Name-O. In it, they claim that it was not Bingo but Pancakes, another monkey in the Dr. Giancarlo's experiment, who typed Shakespeare. They point to the fact that Pancakes was well educated, had traveled to all the countries used as settings in the plays, and had a life that matched up with the action and settings of the plays. Williams has suggested that the aristocratic Pancakes, who was a distant relation of Bingo, would not have wanted the publicity that was sure to follow any monkey who typed Shakespeare and might have wanted to give his "his poorer cousin a paw up" by attributing the typing to him.

James said that he began exploring the connection between Bingo and Pancakes about eight years ago. "It was really an accident," James explains. "I was reading Bingo's dedication for the sonnets, trying to figure out who this mysterious 'Mr. P K' was, when I noticed something strange, something that didn't quite make sense." That something, says James, was a secret code that, when deciphered, read "thy monkey," followed by "Pancakes." After cracking this code, he then checked the names of the monkeys used by Dr. Giancarlo's. He verified that one of the monkeys was indeed named Pancakes, who had been the monkey to the ambassador of France. This time with the ambassador would have given Pancakes the insight into the inner workings of courtly life that Williams and James feel any Shakespeare monkey typist would need. Plus, Williams discovered that Pancakes had been imprisoned in the Paris zoo for siding with Émile Zola in the Dreyfus Affair, which would explain his uncanny ability to type the tragedies, particularly Hamlet. "It's fantasy to believe a monkey like Bingo could have typed such sophisticated plays," says Williams. "Pure fantasy."
Most Bingo scholars disagree. "It's just snobbery," claims Dr. Peter Zeus, recent recipient of the Davy Jones Professorship in Monkey-Typing Studies at Warwick University. "There is plenty of evidence that Bingo received a quite good classical education at Warwickshire, not to mention he was a part of the vibrant London circus society that placed a high value on random-typing skills." Dr. Zeus points to the fact that Bingo would have associated with monkeys from all over the world and therefore would have been familiar with all the cultures that Shakespeare wrote about. "There's just no real evidence that points to any monkey but Bingo." But Dr. Zeus says that people will go on believing that it was simply impossible for a monkey with such a "common" background to have typed Shakespeare's plays. "It's a shame," he says ruefully, "because this was one special monkey. That anyone would deny that Bingo typed Shakespeare just drives me bananas."

Review of Page 86 of A Visit From the Goon Squad

2010-07-22T09:18:00.000-04:00

Writers spend years of their lives working on a book, then someone writes a 500-word review of it, 65% of which is a recap of plot points. So I thought I’d write a review of a single, somewhat random page of Jennifer Egan’s fairly amazing but regularly flawed A Visit From the Goon Squad. Before getting started, though, I should confess that I don’t think I’m up to the task of reviewing this or any other book—I don’t like metaphors, I don’t get symbols, I miss symbols, irony goes right past me, it takes a lot of time to review a whole book—which is probably the main reason I’m writing about one page, rather than out of respect for Egan’s work. But anyway, here goes…

We start with a cliché, the perfect country club woman whose “prodigious childbearing had left no mark on her narrow waist and well-tanned biceps.” (You don’t often hear of the effects of childbearing on biceps.) This woman represents Crandale, the white-bread destination for other clichés, especially hedge-fund managers, though the hedge-fund manager doesn’t appear until the bottom of the page. Tennis is used to establish the uncomfortable surroundings for Stephanie, who “came from nowhere,” but unlike her husband, Bennie, she is from a Midwestern suburban nowhere. (Bennie is from an urban nowhere.) But Egan makes an interesting choice to make Stephanie have a history with tennis—she “achieved a certain greatness at around age thirteen—though she falls back onto cliché, comparing the “greasy burgers” of Stephanie’s youth with Crandale’s salade nicoise (italics hers).

Later, Stephanie and Bennie have gin and tonics, while watching fireflies and listening to a pianist playing “harmless melodies on a shining upright.” Like the childbearing biceps bit, I find the word harmless a strange choice; is it a value judgment? Should a pianist play harmful melodies while people have cocktails? Is there even such a thing as a harmful melody?

We find out that the couple has moved here to mark Bennie’s success in the music business, and its value is put in terms of its distance (physical and mental) from his life growing up in his urban nowhere and his “dark eyed” grandmother. (Another meaningful description where I can’t find enough meaning to satisfy myself that I’ve gotten it.) We are meant to realize that this is just another nowhere, but the women have “shining ponytails,” not dark eyes.

At the end of the page, we find out that the hedge-fund manager is a bit more than just a type, in that he appreciates the band that made Bennie’s reputation. This is a nice touch because it makes Bennie fit in, but in a way that would make him extremely uncomfortable. Bennie, after all, had been the bassist for the punk band the Flaming Dildos (a fake band name that sounds fake, though I’ve not seen many fake bands with names that don’t sound fake), and while hedge funds and dildos are often associated with other, the punk in Bennie would never want to be approved of by a hedge-fund manager named Duck.

And so the page ends with Duck asking whatever happened to Bosco, the guitarist for the band Bennie discovered. Bosco is recording an album, Bennie tells Duck, but leaves out important details. That happens on the top of the next page, so that’s off limits.

As for the book as a whole, I liked it quite a bit. I did feel like there were a lot of characters I’ve seen before in Dead Milkmen videos, but in some cases I guess that was the point. It’s very possible that something is going on with these characters that is more interesting than I realize. But I just couldn’t help thinking that Egan could do better than the runaway with uncaring parents, the suicide, self-destructive musicians, record producers named Lou with underage girlfriends, and country club types who befriend people from nowhere only if they make a good tennis partner (and have dark-eyed husbands they can sleep with).

I am in the minority in some of my criticisms, but I think some are valid. My biggest problem was that a lot of importance was attached to things like “greasy burgers,” which are mildly evocative, but only of something so familiar that it has no meaning. Where’s the beef, you might say.

Again, the book is really quite good, and I recommend it to anyone. It’s complex and moving, plus Egan creates a touching Powerpoint presentation, which is something you rarely see. Her method of storytelling is so compelling that I think the characters in the story might suffer from the comparison. If the characters had been as unpredictable as each new chapter’s style is, A Visit From the Goon Squad would have been one of the best books I’ve ever read.

Woody Allen in the Digital Age: Still Miserable

2010-07-21T09:15:00.000-04:00

You can now get audiobooks of Woody Allen's short stories, read by Allen himself. He seems to have enjoyed the project immensely (NY Times):

Q.What was the recording experience like for you? Did you make any new discoveries about these pieces in rereading them? Did it take you back to the frame of mind you were in when you first wrote them?

A.I imagined it would be quite easy for me and in fact, it turned out to be monstrously hard. I hated every second of it, regretted that I had agreed to it, and after reading one or two stories each day, found myself exhausted. The discovery I made was that any number of stories are really meant to work, and only work, in the mind’s ear and hearing them out loud diminishes their effectiveness. Some of course hold up amusingly but it’s no fun hearing a story that’s really meant to be read, which brings me to your next question and that is that there is no substitute for reading and there never will be. Hearing something aloud is its own experience but it’s hard to beat sitting in bed or in a comfortable chair turning the pages of a book, putting it down, and eagerly awaiting the chance to get back to it.

I'd like to imagine the process being more like this.

Excerpt From Advanced Genius Theory: Mick Jagger

2010-07-20T09:15:00.000-04:00

Mick Jagger is clearly Advanced, and were it not for his guiding hand, it’s easy to imagine the Rolling Stones being just another band that was good for a while, like the Animals or Ebn Ozn.

The case for his being a genius is airtight, so there’s no need to go over that. I think he began his move toward Advancement when the Stones started playing disco music. To clarify, I don’t really hear the disco in their disco songs, plus the songs were huge hits and very good, but still rock purists were pretty unhappy with the development. He embraced internationalism in the form of Bianca Jagger, he was in Freejack, he went solo, reunited with his band, sang with Bette Midler, appeared in a sitcom, sold out a million times over (starting in the sixties with a Rice Krispies commercial), and played the Super Bowl. And then there’s the matter of his look, which may be the most Advanced thing about him.

At various points he had the correct hair length, leather color, and sunglasses tint, but he developed a style of dress that no non-Advanced person could have ever dreamed up. I’m talking about the tights with knee pads, the jerseys, the striped leotards, and the puffy jackets that he has worn on stage the last 30 years or so. What is so baffling is that he was such a stylish dresser at the start of his career; no one has ever rocked sweaters and oxford shirts like he did (Eddie Haskell came close). But once the dress code was relaxed for rock musicians in the late 1960s, his Advancement blossomed. He lost the bad boy in nice clothes look, choosing instead a wardrobe that was a mixture of Gandalf and Philadelphia Eagles cheerleader. Even more amazing is that he dresses normal, even well, offstage. So what’s going on?

One thing about Advanced front men is that they cannot be embarrassed. They will sing in falsetto, sing with a pronounced southern accent even though they are from England, dance like a chicken, and do Inkspots-inspired voiceovers about fine Arab chargers. It is this fearlessness, though, that makes them able to give full voice to their genius. In the case of Jagger’s clothes and general onstage persona, it does seem ridiculous, but he is an incredibly effective performer. He comes from an era where entertainers took their jobs seriously, which included wearing clothes that separated them from the audience. Jagger certainly meets this objective. As I said before, he is the reason the Stones are still around, and a big part of that is because he is still so interesting to watch. Make fun of his clothes, his pointing, and his lip contortions all you want, but the guy gets the crowd worked up, even those who are sitting in the top row of a football stadium a half-mile from the stage. (I think he got into the garish costumes when they were playing in stadiums before the advent of Jumbotrons. It was just a way to be seen.)

Many Overt people feel like he shouldn’t be on the stage anymore, regardless of his clothes. They say that Jagger and the Stones tour only for the money and their recent records are just irrelevant throwaways. This is ridiculous, as they certainly have more money than they could possibly need, and it would keep pouring in whether they were touring or not. They tour because they love playing live, and all the musicians they worshipped played until they couldn’t play any more. If they didn’t like it, they wouldn’t do it. As for the records, it is extremely difficult and time consuming to make a record, and they really don’t make that much money for an artist. Sure the records since Steel Wheels are hard to get into right away because they don’t sound like the old Stones, just as it is difficult to enjoy any new music put out by a musician whose “prime” has passed. But if you haven’t listened to Voodoo Lounge as many times and with as much care (or drugs) as you did Exile on Main Street, how do you really know it’s not as good? You may dismiss this idea, but you probably also dismissed Voodoo Lounge before you even heard it. There aren’t that many musicians as Advanced as Mick Jagger, so you could only benefit from giving him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you’ve been hoping that there would be another great Stones record some day, so wouldn’t it be great if it’s already on your iPod?

So My Amazon.com Review Wasn't Helpful, Huh?

2010-07-16T15:27:00.002-04:00

I'm going to get the guy who didn't find my Amazon.com review of "Steve Miller Band: Greatest Hits 1974–1978" helpful. I mean, I'm really going to get him. Eighteen people read my review, and seventeen found it helpful. Now you tell me if I've got a problem or that guy does. It's him, right? Well, now he's got another problem: I'm coming after him.

This guy is seriously dense if it doesn't help him to know that "Swingtown" builds a foundation of rhythm piece-by-piece, then adds contrapuntal layers of melody, and finally bursts into an understated chorus that is surprisingly effective. What does this guy want, anyway? He's probably just bummed that "Abracadabra" isn't included on the album. I admit that "Abracadabra" is a great song that had Miller furthering his visionary exploration of synthesizers that began with songs like "Fly Like an Eagle" and "Rockin' Me." But it came out after 1978! If you want "Abracadabra, get "Young Hearts: Greatest Hits" you moron.

By the way, jerk, "The Joker" is not about cards or Batman. It's an exploration of the divide between appearance and reality. It also deals with the decline of traditional ideas of masculinity in an increasingly yonic society. I mean doesn't he hear the guitar making that whistling noise? And can't he understand that "Take the Money and Run" is about the importance of personal responsibility in an era dominated by moral relativism? I tell you who did understand it: seventeen other people. So take that, jackass.

Hey, I don't even like Steve Miler that much. I'm much more of a Bob Seger guy. But I like to help people who don't know as much about music as I do. I guess some people just can't be helped. Anyway, when I find "justamusicfan," he's going to regret he ever read that "Wild Mountain Honey," while considered an afterthought by many, shows that Miller is in the same class of singer-songwriters that includes James Taylor and Jackson Browne.

Yeah, he's really going to regret that he ever read that.

Sting at Chastain Park - Concert Review

2010-07-14T16:52:00.000-04:00

As you may know, I have had a difficult time judging whether Sting is Advanced. I wrote about it in my book and included one of his songs in a song list I did for the New York Times. But I had never seen him live before, which I thought might be the reason why I felt it so difficult to judge him. So I was excited to find out he was bringing his "Symponicity" tour to Atlanta's Chastain Park. As you will see this concert experience did little to clear up the matter of Sting's Advancement.

I had arranged to borrow my brother's car to get to the show because my wife was out of town with ours. I printed out my ticket at work, put it in my bag, and raced to my brother's house, catching both trains just in time. A perfect start. I got the keys to the car from my sister-in-law, then went out to the back of the house, where the car was parked. His car doesn't have a trunk, so I was worried about leaving my bag in it during the concert, so I cleverly hid it behind a post in the back yard, under the deck, then headed off to the show.

I got there about 35 minutes early, so I was feeling good. As I pulled into one of the last free parking spots, I realized that my clever idea with the bag was actually stupid, because that is where my ticket was. It was going to take me at least 45 minutes to get to the house and back, but I figured he wouldn't start exactly on time. I realized on my way that the car was low on gas, so low that I would have to stop. Five more minutes down. I put $10 in, got to the house, grabbed my ticket, and headed back to Chastain Park.

When I got there again, almost all the parking was taken up, so I drove around and around, killing another 10 minutes. As I drove by, I heard a snippet of "Englishman in New York," which sounded fantastic. As an aside: why do DJs always cut off the end of that song before the "it's a big enough umbrella" line? Anyway, I found a ($15) parking space and ran up a huge hill in the sweltering Georgia heat.

When I arrived at the gate, he was just finishing a beautiful version of "Roxanne." I gave the woman my ticket and asked how long he had been playing. She started to say "not long," but then stopped, looked at my ticket, and revealed to me that it was for the next night's show. I didn't know there were two shows, so I didn't even bother to check. People at the gate all got a good laugh.

The next morning, I woke up feeling a little funny, and by the time I started to go to work, I realized that I was too sick to drive. There would be no Sting concert for me, and my frustrating relationship would continue.

My rating of the 38 seconds I heard: 4 stars

Liz Phair Wants to Be Advanced

2010-07-13T13:38:00.000-04:00

According to her post "how to like it" on her site:

You were never supposed to hear these songs. These songs lost me my management, my record deal and a lot of nights of sleep.

Yes, I rapped one of them. Im as surprised as you are. But here is the thing you need to know about these songs and the ones coming next: These are all me. Love them, or hate them, but dont mistake them for anything other than an entirely personal, un-tethered-from-the-machine, free for all view of the world, refracted through my own crazy lens.

This is my journey. Ill keep sending you postcards.

She had me for a moment but then it occurred to me that it's a little bit too close to an apology or at least an attempt to distance herself from any criticism one might have. The Advanced don't say, "Hey, this is Advanced, so that's why it sounds strange." I also find her reference to her "own crazy lens" to be on the Overt side, as everyone Overt wants people to think they're weird. Still, I do like that she raps.

Sting Is Pretentious (And We're Both Okay With It)

2010-07-13T08:51:00.000-04:00

A couple of bits from the NYT:

The apartment’s host can sometimes seem like the ultimate version of that co-worker or college-reunion acquaintance who is always one-upping your anecdotes: ask Sting about the 19th-century aluminum double bass he keeps near his bookshelves and he will say he uses it to play “one little piece of Purcell every day and that’s it”; mention the two chess sets he keeps on his coffee table and he’ll tell you about the matches he played against the grandmaster Garry Kasparov. (“Of course he beat me every time. But you know, he can’t sing.”)

And if that same eclecticism has led Sting far from his origins as a rebellious rocker, he knows how it makes him look to some listeners.

“Of course I do,” he said. “I come off as being pretentious and all that stuff. Don’t care.”

Sting, 58, said the appreciation for classical music he cultivated from the piano playing of his hairdresser mother and BBC radio of the 1950s was not something he could readily confess to back in his Police days.

“It was frowned upon,” he said, “and that’s the whole ridiculous premise of rock ’n’ roll becoming this Taliban-esque, closed thing. ‘You can’t do that, you can’t do that.’ What’s the spirit of rock ’n’ roll except freedom — freedom to do whatever you want?”

And...

This being Sting, conversation with him naturally turned to subjects like the BP oil spill, the possibility of sustainable fuel sources and Eastern mysticism — in this case via the decorative Tibetan dZi stone he wears around his neck. (“They say they are planted by Bodhisattvas,” he said. “I have no way of verifying the truth of that, but it’s a beautiful thing.”)

It also returned to the meaning of the word pretentious, which Sting pointed out comes from the same root as the word pretend. Though he embraces the label, Sting said: “I’m not pretending anything. I’m curious, I’m finding out. I’m enthusiastic about stuff.”

He added, “What am I supposed to do, stay in my box?,” cheerfully punctuating the remark with a vulgar phrase more closely associated with his punk-rock days.

Rock on, Sting.

Jacobpedia Is Funny

2010-07-10T17:59:00.000-04:00

This person is not a fan of my book, writing:

Hartley states that most people think his theory is a joke, although he insists it isn’t. I can’t believe he is earnest. I have been a Dylan fan for as long as I can remember, and Reed’s work with the Velvet Underground is enough to put him in the pantheon of rock musicians. But, no matter what mental gymnastics you want to go through to prove otherwise, Dylan and Reed actually lost it. (Dylan, though, climbed out of his ’80s trough, beginning with 1989′s Oh Mercy.) Whether the issue was apathy, drug and alcohol abuse, or simply using up all their good ideas, many of the artists who made their names in the 1960s and early ’70s lost their way in the ’80s. And although Hartley equates the “advancement” of the ’80s with Dylan going electric in 1965, no artist of that generation released anything in the ’80s that matched his/her/their earlier output. Plus, Hartley instantly loses his argument by including Brian Wilson’s “Smart Girls” on his list of examples of Advancement in practice. By insisting that “Smart Girls” is anything but a crime against the hearing public, Hartley reveals that he is an irrational person.

That's fine. But now he's going after Lou Reed and his photography:

[Reed's] “horseshit-generating powers” have been pretty spectacular throughout his career, but since the early-’70s, he hasn’t done much of anything that warrants paying attention to his pompous pronouncements. And, being the driving force behind the Velvet Underground doesn’t earn you forty years of good will. At this point, I’m mostly just amused by how awesome he thinks he is and how seriously he takes himself.

I'm going to pretend to be rational for a moment: if my defense of "Smart Girls" shows that my theory is without merit, what are we to make of someone who makes a statement like, "since the early-’70s, he hasn’t done much of anything that warrants paying attention to his pompous pronouncements"? Not much since the early 1970s? Talk about pompous pronouncements! I guess all of us who like The Bells and New York and Magic and Loss and so on are just idiots. But not as big of an idiot of Lou Reed, of course, who has the audacity to show his photography in an exhibition and call one of his photos "Gorgon." Lucky for Reed the blogger does admit that the Velvet Underground was great. What a relief!

A Note to My Next Mugger

2010-07-09T09:51:00.000-04:00

Before you begin mugging me, I'd like to give you a few pointers:

If you're feeling nervous at all, don't worry: I have lots of experience, so I can walk you through the process. The main thing to remember is that I'm more afraid of you than you are of me. If that doesn't help, just imagine me in my underwear. Better yet, make me take my pants off and you can see me in my underwear. If you don't have a gun, tell me that you do, and I am certain to believe you. If you do have a gun, you can shoot me with it, but that should be a last resort.

If you are a woman, as three of my muggers have been, I apologize in advance for telling people that you were a man.

It would be great if you didn't yell too much because that makes me panic a little, which will make you yell more. It's sort of an unpleasant cycle that usually ends with my getting shot or stabbed, and I'd like to think that we both want to avoid that. Also, if you could make an effort not to rush me, I think everything will go much more smoothly. Ironically, it seems like the less I'm rushed, the quicker the mugging is. I could be wrong, but it has always seemed that way to me.

If you plan to attack me, I would appreciate your not attacking me from behind. I might instinctively try to resist if I don't see you coming, and then you might instinctively shoot or stab me. I would prefer, of course, that you not attack me at all. A menacing look is all that is required.

I keep my wallet in my right back pocket. Don't worry, there's no chain or anything. I keep an emergency twenty in my sock, but I would prefer your not taking in it. In exchange, I won't report my credit cards stolen for 24 hours. This way, I get to take a cab home, and you can get a few things with my credit card.

I do not wear any jewelry, but after the mugging, since you'll have my credit cards, you can buy some if you'd like. I know a good jeweler. He's a friend of the family, so if you say you know me, he'll give you a deal.

When you've gotten everything you need, you can tie me to a nearby fence or sign. Just for this purpose, I always keep some rope that doesn't chafe against my skin but still holds fast.

That really covers everything. Every mugger has his own interpretation of how to do a proper mugging, so I will respect your decisions. But if you follow my advice, the whole mugging can be as quick as a handshake.

I look forward to being mugged by you, and good luck!

Advanced Genius Theory Book Review

2010-07-07T08:47:00.000-04:00

There is a very nice interview at adequacy.net. My favorite part had only a little to do with the book:

Sitting back while Hartley elaborates the theory and reasons whether so-and-so has Advanced or is a even a candidate for future Advancement is a true pleasure. If you and your friends have ever taken an absurd idea to the extreme, The Advanced Genius Theory should strike a chord with you. For instance, one night my buddies and I came along a copy of Face Value by Phil Collins and “discovered” Collinsization, which is simply playing Phil Collins to one of your friends when they don’t expect it (and it predated the Rick Roll by a good 5 years). So that night we called our one friend who admitted the first cassette he owned was Invisible Touch, and another friend who is English and so was guilty by geography, and simply played a little “In the Air Tonight” and “I Missed Again” into the telephone. It was such a fun humiliation game that we spent the rest of the night hashing the theory out: If you hear Collins, it’s Collinsization, but if you hear a Genesis song it’s Genesicide, and if you listen to Phil Collins on purpose it’s called Sussudiocide. In those years it wasn’t strange to see someone cover their ears and run out of a bar to avoid the humiliation. Debates carried on about whether you could be visually Collinsized simply by seeing his face, or if his voice and/or drum breaks were the only valid means to the end. Side theories developed such as Enomunization, or the idea that listening to Phil Collins in small doses as the drummer on Brian Eno’s solo records makes you less susceptible to harm through Collinsization. It is this rigorous and imaginative spirit that Hartley channels when detailing Advancement.

Sussudiocide.

Bobcat Goldthwait to Turn Kinks Album Into Movie

2010-07-01T16:46:00.000-04:00

Oh my (Guardian):

Raspy-voiced comedian Bobcat Goldthwait will direct a film based on the Kinks' Schoolboys in Disgrace, according to reports. The manic funny man, best known for appearing in the Police Academy films, has written a screenplay based on the 1976 album. Ray Davies will act as executive producer.

The original Schoolboys in Disgrace is a musical about a young trouble-maker, who transforms into super-villain Mr Flashs after being humiliated by his headmaster. "Schoolboys in Disgrace is a story that any kid who has felt that they are not being treated fairly can relate to, all set to some of the greatest rock songs you'll ever hear," Goldthwait told the Hollywood Reporter.

I hereby declare this the most exciting--and potentially Advanced--project of the year! (Thanks to Jeff)

The Velvet Underground - The Quine Tapes

2010-06-30T13:30:00.000-04:00

Wow:

The Velvet Underground – The Quine Tapes is a definitive document of the live Velvet Underground. Captured on tape by Quine in San Francisco and St. Louis between May and December of 1969, the recordings feature the Velvet Underground’s final lineup of Reed, guitarist Sterling Morrison, drummer Moe Tucker and bassist Doug Yule. The material includes incendiary performances of such seminal Velvets standards as “I’m Waiting for the Man,” “What Goes On,” “Sunday Morning,” “Femme Fatale,” “White Light/White Heat,” “Venus in Furs,” “Heroin,” “New Age,” “The Black Angel’s Death Song” and “Rock and Roll.” Also included is a rare performance of the “Follow the Leader,” an original song which the band never officially released, as well as stunningly different versions of the epic “Sister Ray.”

More here.

Gorillaz & Lou Reed - Some Kind of Nature Live at Glastonbury 2010

2010-06-28T14:38:00.001-04:00

Please note everything about this performance by Lou Reed with Gorillaz.

Steve Martin's Tour Rider

2010-06-27T16:56:00.001-04:00

Click and blow up, or see it here.

Why Are Our Pirates So Depressed?

2010-06-25T08:58:00.000-04:00

"I feel like I'm in a hole that just keeps getting deeper and blacker. I know rationally that there's nothing wrong, but I just can't feel happy. And I cry at everything: TV commercials, books, plundering, you name it. Yar."
-- Black B.

Why is one of the most powerful, wealthy, and feared pirates in history so unhappy? He is suffering from the little-known condition Un-Jolly Roger Syndrome (UJRS). Pirates dedicate their existence almost exclusively to finding treasure, often at the expense of getting an education, developing a strong support system, or creating the social network necessary for dealing with life after the treasure is found. They define themselves by their search for gold, diamonds, rubies, and assorted valuables, so once the search is over, a void is left that they find difficult to fill. "I thought all my troubles were over when I found that treasure," says Black B., "But boy, was I ever wrong. Once the euphoria wore off, I realized that it was the hunting for the treasure that sustained me, not the treasure itself." And Black B. is not alone.

"After I found my treasure, I gave up pirating right away. Now I have to find an excuse to wake up in the morning. Sure, I've knocked three strokes off my handicap, but I used to be the terror of the Seven Seas for chrissakes. Yar!"
-- Blue B.

Like many retirees, pirates have a hard time adjusting to life after they acquire their treasure and leave pirating behind. This transition is particularly difficult for them because they have spent their lives at sea and are not used to day-to-day life on land. "I had never taken out the garbage in my life," observes Blue B. "Now, I have to do it every Monday and Thursday. What? Oh, I mean, Tuesday and Friday. I always forget." Blue B. says that his efforts to find a substitute for the highs of searching for treasure gave him little satisfaction: "For a while there, I was really into Napster. It was kind of cool that I could get all my favorite shanties for nothing. I was a pirate again! But then those landlubbers at the RIAA put a stop to that. I mean, I still steal software, but it's not the same." Blue B. eventually put his treasure in a chest, buried it, made a map disclosing the chest's location, and then left the map in a location that was not secure. "I know it sounds stupid. I spend my whole life seeking treasure, then, when I finally find it, I bury it, make a map with a big X on it where the treasure is, and leave the map lying around where just about anyone could find it. And the clues were really easy to figure out. It's like I wanted someone to find it so I have to go get my treasure back."

"Sometimes I think the world with just be better off if I let that crocodile eat me. Yar?"
-- Captain H.

A big part of pirate culture is excessive consumption of spirits, so many with UJRS are also alcoholics. This problem is exacerbated because most pirates do not feel comfortable talking openly about their feelings, even though alcoholism and depression are extremely common in this population. Consequently, they feel isolated, causing them to drink even more as a form of self-medication. This cycle can make their depression worse and can even lead to suicide. Though no official statistics exist, it has been estimated that more than 3,000 pirates a year walk off their own planks. In one of our interviews, Captain H. mused, "There isn't a whole lot of 'yo-ho-ho' left in my life." He added with a mournful chuckle, "But there's plenty of rum." A week after he was interviewed for this article, Captain H. was tragically murdered by an assailant who was described as "dressed in green, extremely quick and elusive...almost childlike." Many who knew the captain question whether his death might have actually been, effectively, a suicide. "It was like he just let it happen. How could that little guy kill such a powerful man?" said a friend who sailed with the captain for seventeen years. "It just doesn't make any sense, you know?"

"I even kicked my parrot. That was when I knew I needed help. Yar...."
--Long John S.

The good news is that UJRS can be overcome with therapy and medication. After three stints in a rehabilitation clinic, Black B. started a twelve-step program just for pirates called "You Are Remarkable" or Y.A.R. "We've got more than 8,000 members at Y.A.R. in five different countries." Blue B. became a member of Y.A.R. a year ago and has recently won his first tournament on the Senior PGA Tour. Long John S., who is not a member or Y.A.R. but attends therapy regularly, is perhaps the most successful ex-pirate of them all. His therapist, Dr. Robin Cohen, treats several ex-pirates with UJRS. His approach, which he calls "Thinking Outside the Chest," encourages them to focus on other aspects of life besides treasure. According to Long John S., the approach works. "Sure, I had tons of treasure, but Dr. C made me realize that it wasn't worth anything just sitting in a chest." With his treasure and a small-business grant from the state of California, Long John S. started a business of his own. "I asked myself, 'Long, what do you know better than anything?' The answer was seafood." His seafood restaurant was an immediate success and has since grown into an international franchise. Long John S. now splits his time between his business and motivational speaking, using his own story as inspiration to audiences across the world. "I thought my life was over after pirating. But now I'm one of the most successful businessmen in the United States. Yar."

The Cambridge Companion to Schoenberg

2010-06-22T17:20:00.001-04:00

From a press release:

"“The artist never has a relationship with the world, but rather always against it; he turns his back on it, just as it deserves. But his most fervent wish is to be so independent…”
–Arnold Schoenberg

One of the most important and controversial figures in 20th century music, Austrian composer Arnold Schoenberg (1874-1951) has often been labeled as an isolated elitist. His notoriously challenging work has polarized the music community: while some consider his works, theories, and signature ideas as essential, for many his music remains beyond the pale. Both sides of the debate, however, perceive Schoenberg as a contrarian artist cut off from society—is this justified?

The Cambridge Companion to Schoenberg (Cambridge University Press, August 2nd, 2010) rejects such monolithic views, and instead demonstrates how Schoenberg’s music and thought were profoundly engaged with the musical and artistic movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Edited by Jennifer Shaw and Joseph Auner, this unique volume illustrates that Schoenberg’s music incorporated and critiqued the fundamental cultural, social, and political disruptions that he lived through. Furthermore, it discusses in-depth Schoenberg’s little-known, mutually influential relationships with major figures, such as Richard Strauss, Wassily
Kadinsky, and Hanns Eisler.

With 15 other expert contributors, The Cambridge Companion to Schoenberg includes:

· Introductions to Schoenberg’s important works and to his
groundbreaking innovations, such as twelve-tone compositions
· Assessments of his interactions with leading artists and composers
· A discussion of his lasting influence on other composers and writers
over the last century"

Overt or Advanced? And why doesn't anyone dress for ping pong anymore?

The Week: Jason Hartley's 6 Favorite Books (Hey, That's Me!)

2010-06-18T17:38:00.000-04:00

Not really my favorite books, but six books that have some connection with the Advanced Genius Theory. Check it out at The Week!

The Energy Solution

2010-06-18T09:08:00.000-04:00

The announcement three months ago that Europa, one of the moons of Jupiter, has the potential of producing nearly two years' worth of oil created quite a buzz in the energy industry. And last night, Ted Stevens, CEO of a consortium of oil companies called NewEnergy, announced that it, along with General Motors, has devised a way to get the oil safely and cheaply. Soon after the oil was discovered, Exxon, Shell, and British Petroleum pooled their research and development teams to find an efficient means of getting to Jupiter, putting in place drilling equipment, extracting the oil, and getting it back to Earth. "We knew it would be too expensive to launch a traditional rocket because the payload would be so great," said Piet Balkenende, the leader of the Shell team. "So we modified an engine that would not only launch the rocket, but power the vehicles and drilling equipment." This engine, called the Bunny (after the popular mascot for Energizer batteries), is similar to a regular combustion engine, but instead of liquid fuel, it uses a battery only slightly more powerful than an ordinary nine-volt. The rechargeable battery can power the engine of the moon vehicle for six years or more with just one charge.

According to Mr. Balkenende, this technology is not entirely new. "Since 1968, we'd had a working prototype that powered a vehicle we called the Batt-Mobile [an allusion to the Batmobile from TV's Batman], but we just didn't have a commercial use for it. So it just sat around our facility gathering dust." After the oil was discovered on Europa, that changed. "One of our technicians was thinking about the launch problem when he decided to take the Batt-Mobile out for a spin to relax his mind," explained Mr. Balkenende. "After riding around for a bit, he asked a technician when the battery had last been charged. When he discovered that it hadn't been charged for nearly 40 years, he thought maybe he had found a solution to our problem." Still, even with the Bunny, the necessary equipment to extract the oil would be too heavy to be carried to Europa. That's where General Motors came in.

"During the 1970s we developed an alloy called Feather Steel that was stronger than titanium but was as light as balsa wood," says James Bryson, head of product development at General Motors. "Not only was it strong and light, but it was incredibly cheap. But what do you do with something like that?" GM scrapped the Feather Steel project, and it was all but forgotten. However, Ronald Murray, a member of the original team that developed Feather Steel heard about NewEnergy's problem and thought the alloy was the answer. Mr. Murray contacted Mr. Bryson, who then contacted Mr. Stevens with whom he went to Andover Academy. "I knew that if we could make the space cars and drilling equipment from Feather Steel," said Mr. Bryson, "we'd be in business."

The teams at NewEnergy and General Motors quickly went to work, and, within a week, they had a working vehicle called the Batt-Mobile Lite, as well as drilling equipment weighing a total of five and a half pounds. The oil will be stored in new Feather Steel tanks that will be able to withstand the stress and heat of re-entering the earth's atmosphere. Mr. Bryson reported that "The tanks are spill proof, so even if the rocket crashes in the ocean, we won't lose a drop." The rocket's engine was fitted with a Bunny the size of a loaf of bread, which will provide more than enough power to get the rocket and its payload to Europa and back. There has been only one minor setback: The launch was scheduled on July 12 (Henry Thoreau's birthday), but it had to be moved to July 30 (Henry Ford's birthday) due to recent flooding caused by the melting of a nearby glacier.

Mr. Stevens believes that the Bunny and Feather Steel could have many uses in the future. "We plan to send out rockets all over the galaxy in search for petroleum. The Batt-Mobile Lite costs only about $15 to make, so there's virtually no limit to how many planets and moons we can explore." After a moment of reflection, he added, "Just think: If we can find oil out in the far reaches of space, we could solve our energy problem here on earth for generations to come without asking people to change the way they live." And we'll have the heroes at General Motors and NewEnergy to thank.

Advanced Genius Theory on EW Book Blog, Shelf Life

2010-06-11T09:18:00.001-04:00

See it all here, and read a snippet below:

Do people ever argue with you? Do they say, ‘So and so isn’t Advanced, what are you talking about’?
First they dismiss the idea completely, and think I’m joking. I say no, I’m not joking. Then they get mad at the idea, because they think Well, if you’re just saying that everything they do is good, then you’re giving all the power away of discernment. Once I tell them Well, the reason why I feel like it’s ok to say that whatever Lou Reed produces is going to be good is because he did good work for 25 years and why would he all of a sudden become wrong, then they’ll kind of be mad. Then they’ll come back to me an hour later and say, What about Prince, and I’ll answer. Then they’ll come back later and say, What about George Clinton, and I’ll say No, he’s not, and they’ll get mad again. Then they’ll come back with a few more guesses and once they’re right few times, they become addicted and won’t leave me alone! That’s usually what happens. Some people won’t even entertain the idea, and I think that is to their detriment.
What made you decide to write this book? Were so many people asking you for the rules you decided to make this handbook?
Partially that. People kept asking about it after basically 15 years or so of talking about it. Different people would ask, and it always seemed to catch on with people. I’m not necessarily great at figuring out what people care about. I can’t pitch articles, I can’t do any of that stuff, but this seemed to have some broad and lasting appeal. It wasn’t a purely commercial idea, although selling out is advanced, so I’m not ashamed to say it. [laughs] It struck me that it did have some appeal, and when I started to bat the idea around I started to see that there was more to it, and it started to develop as a more holistic look at art and genius and our perception of those things. It started to be more of a way of life and a way of looking at life than just a way to explain Lou Reed’s bad haircut.

After you read it, why not join the Advanced Genius Theory facebook group? Would love to have you.

Megan Fox: The Girl With the Advanced Tattoo?

2010-06-09T09:22:00.003-04:00

Apparently there is some interest in one of Megan Fox's tattoos (EW):

Celebrity tattoos can be meaningful (Angelina Jolie’s veritable UNESCO of cultural runes), amusing (Johnny Depp’s palimpsestic “Wino Forever”), and unfortunate (everything Steve-O has ever done to himself), but rarely are they truly mysterious. Now, of all people, Megan Fox is stirring up literary debate over who is the source of her latest inking. With all the words written on her body, it makes you wonder whether she might be suffering from some Memento-style amnesia, but this newest text is probably a little too cryptic to be of any practical use. Her right side now reads “Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music.”

That is not the worst way to describe the reaction to Advanced Artists. I'm going to have thoroughly research images of Fox to see if she merits any consideration.

Dr. Demento Going off the Air (Sort of)

2010-06-08T09:17:00.000-04:00

From the website:

This weekend, the Dr. Demento Show will have its final broadcast on KIYU, KLOO, WLVQ (QFM96), WRKH (The Rocket) and KOZT (The Coast).

This was a very painful decision for the Doctor...he really hates to let it go after almost 40 years...but he has come to agree with his manager and his family that it's necessary. The broadcast has been losing money for some time.

THE GOOD NEWS -- Dr. Demento intends to continue producing new shows every week for www.drdemento.com for the foreseeable future. A new one will be available Saturday morning, June 12, and more new shows will be posted every Saturday thereafter.

Also...if you live in or around Amarillo, TX, you're in luck...by special agreement and due to contractual considerations, a version of the internet show will be heard weekly on KACV-FM there, at least through the summer.

The Doctor wishes to express his grateful appreciation to everyone who's been listening in Alaska, Oregon, Ohio, Alabama and California, and hopes all of you will give the www.drdemento.com broadcast a try.

Stay deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeemented!

I'm surprisingly sad about this, though I haven't listened to the radio show in probably 25 years. I'm glad the show will continue on the Internet, though. In fact, I might just go check out the archive right now.

Salon on Dennis Hopper's Advancement

2010-06-02T16:39:00.000-04:00

There was quite a bit of Advancement in Dennis Hopper's career, and Salon has a pretty good take on him (slightly old):

Before Dennis Hopper, who died Saturday of prostate cancer, became a rebel filmmaker or a generational symbol or a legendary debauchee or a Hollywood aesthete and Renaissance man (or a George W. Bush Republican and then an Obama voter), he was an actor. I'm inclined to believe that all the roles Hopper played across 74 years of life and more than 50 years of moviemaking were aspects of his acting career, of his passionate interest in the mysterious fusion of being, imagining and pretending that allows you to be yourself and someone else at the same time.
Hopper appeared in a handful of memorable films -- "Apocalypse Now," "The American Friend" and "Blue Velvet," along with his own "Easy Rider" -- and a seemingly infinite litany of forgettable ones. Even when he performed in children's TV or straight-to-video Eurothrillers or the 1993 film version of "Super Mario Bros.," you always had the feeling that Hopper was performing a kind of existential high-wire act, perhaps more for himself than the audience: How much of his own soulful madness would he let out? How much of the inanity and mediocrity around him would he absorb?

There's more good stuff in the article...

Advanced Genius Theory in Publishers Weekly

2010-05-29T15:07:00.000-04:00

A review (Publishers Weekly):

Jason Hartley, foreword by Chuck Klosterman. Scribner, $15 paper (288p) ISBN 9781439102367
Fans of any art form or entertainment—especially music—have seen at least one beloved favorite's youthful brilliance, with time, turn to embarrassing self-parody. What pop culture writer Hartley proposes is that their genius hasn't faded—it's just outstripped the public's ability to appreciate. Though it can feel a bit tongue-in-cheek, Hartley gently advances his "Advanced Genius Theory" with rigor, enthusiasm, and a game sense of (re-)discovery. Eschewing the snide critical distance that many fans take for granted, Hartley gives the artist in question the benefit of the doubt: if we accept that Lou Reed, for example, was a musical genius in his youth, are we even qualified to say he's lost his brilliance as he's gotten older? (Regarding George Lucas, Hartley submits: "The fact is, Jar Jar Binks is no better or worse than Chewbacca. Just ask your dad.") Defining his terms clearly ("Advanced" geniuses must have alienated their original fans and lost much of their popularity), he proceeds through key aspects and examples of his theory, including the ideas of "Overt" achievement and "Irritants," the "most advanced musicians of all time" (Bob Dylan and Lou Reed), and the Advanced success story of Steve Martin. Though it should ignite many debates over whether your current favorite is Overt or Advanced, it also shows that, in either case, there's more pleasure to be found when one keeps an open mind.

This reviewer understands me.

Advanced Genius Theory on Too Much Information

2010-05-25T17:06:00.001-04:00

I did a live, one-hour show at WFMU yesterday. The show is called Too Much Information and the host, Benjamin Walker, was really accommodating. Plus he had a great take on the Advanced Theory. I only wish we could have had another hour.

If you want to listen to the results, go to the TMI page.

I'm going to be doing a few other radio appearances. If you want updates, just look at the Twitter thing on the side of this blog, follow me on Twitter, or join my facebook group, all of which you can do by clicking those big pictures to the right.

And, oh yeah, you can also buy my book.

Orson Welles at Salon.com

2010-05-20T09:22:00.000-04:00

This idea sounds familiar:

In one basic respect, [author] Chris Feder shares with the general public a sense of frustration that the great man didn't furnish what was either wanted or expected of him most of the time; this was his genius as well as his misfortune. For in order for an artist (or a father) to be consistent and dependable -- that is to say, consumable, offering some sense of security -- he has to behave predictably, and this was the last thing Welles was capable of doing most of the time. Producing works that were unforeseeable and therefore somewhat indigestible when they first appeared, which meant that we all often had to spend years catching up with them, he was out of step mainly because he remained ahead of our expectations. He had to pay an enormous price for this, but so did we.

Read the whole thing.

Advanced Genius Theory in AccessAtlanta

2010-05-18T13:07:00.000-04:00

Had a good interview with an editor at the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Here's a bit of the article on one of their partner sites:

For everyone who has ever bought the latest CD by their favorite rock legend and been disappointed, here’s the book for you.
“The Advanced Genius Theory” (Simon and Schuster, $15) by Atlanta author Jason Hartley asserts that no matter what they do, musicians like Brian Wilson, Sting and Bob Dylan have not lost their musical minds. They are just so genius, they are still ahead of the times, and their former fans just haven’t caught up to them yet.
Hartley’s theory, which he first cooked up over a meal at Pizza Hut with lifelong friend Britt Bergman, classifies musicians as Overt or Advanced. Overt musicians may be “conventionally brilliant,” but their talent is limited, and they tend to appeal to a small fan base. Advanced musicians start out Overt, but not only do they eventually gain a mass following, they ultimately alienate their original fan base by producing work spectacularly different from what launched their careers.

There may be more in the AJC Sunday paper.

George Lucas Writes a Letter to "Lost"

2010-05-18T09:13:00.000-04:00

From Zap2it:

Congratulations on pulling off an amazing show. Don't tell anyone ... but when 'Star Wars' first came out, I didn't know where it was going either. The trick is to pretend you've planned the whole thing out in advance. Throw in some father issues and references to other stories -- let's call them homages -- and you've got a series.

In six seasons, you've managed to span both time and space, and I don't think I'm alone in saying that I never saw what was around the corner. Now that it's all coming to an end, it's impressive to see how much was planned out in advance and how neatly you've wrapped up everything. You've created something really special. I'm sad that the series is ending, but I look forward to seeing what you two are going to do next.

That first part is further evidence that he is Advanced. Speaking of which, the book goes on sale today. Get it anywhere, including Amazon.

Advanced Genius Theory at Atlanta's Yacht Club (A Capella Books)

2010-05-17T11:26:00.001-04:00

I'll be appearing at the Euclid Avenue Yacht Club at 7 PM on Thursday night.Come join me if you can. I'll be signing books and reading, plus taking a few questions I would imagine.

The Yacht Club is located in the heart of little 5 points:
1136 Euclid Ave NE | Atlanta, GA 30307 | 404.688.2582

Advanced Genius Theory in the Wall StreetJournal

2010-05-16T13:18:00.001-04:00

I wrote something for WSJ. I'll let them describe the premise:

People routinely argue the late-career output of brilliant artists like Bob Dylan or Steve Martin is inferior to their earlier work. Who could watch “Cheaper by the Dozen 2″ and think it’s as good as “The Jerk?” In his new book,”The Advanced Genius Theory” (Scribner), author Jason Hartley offers an intriguing defense, suggesting our creative heroes are so sophisticated we can’t understand their artistic intentions.
Intrigued, we asked Hartley to put his theory to the test and argue the merits of Paul McCartney’s “Freedom” — a 9/11 tribute song so trite it’s actually offensive.

Read why it isn't offensive at all!

New Devo Album

2010-05-13T09:04:00.000-04:00

Allow me to cut and paste from a press release I just got:

DEVO are set to release their first new studio album in 20 years. The new album, entitled "Something For Everybody," is the follow-up to 1990's "Smooth Noodle Maps." UK release date for the album is Monday June 14th, followed by North American release on Tuesday 15th June.

Thirty years ago, people said that we were cynical, that we had a bad attitude, says Devo's Mark Mothersbaugh. "But now, when you ask people if de-evolution is real, they understand that there was something to what we were saying. It's not the kind of thing you want to see proven right, but it does make it easier to talk about."

More than three decades after the release of their visionary debut, Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo, and a full 20 years since their last studio album, Devo are back with the aptly titled "Something for Everybody". The long rumored, wildly anticipated album (which was recently launched with a memorable performance in Vancouver at the Winter Olympics) features the band's classic line-up - Mark and Bob Mothersbaugh, Gerald and Bob Casale - joined by drummer Josh Freese (Nine Inch Nails, Guns n' Roses). Click here for the full announcement and album artwork - http://www.noblepr.co.uk/Press_Releases/wme/devo.htm Produced by Greg Kurstin (The Bird & The Bee), the album also includes contributions from John Hill and Santi White (better known as rising hip-hop star Santigold), John King of the Dust Brothers, and the Teddybears.

Devo's sound, style, and philosophy have been an influence on artists from Rage Against the Machine to Lady Gaga. Kurt Cobain once said, "Of all the bands who came from the underground and actually made it in the mainstream, Devo is the most challenging and subversive of all." The world is in sync with Devo, says his band-mate and co-writer Gerald Casale. "We're not the guys who freak people out and scare them - we're like the house band on the Titanic, entertaining everybody as we go down."

Advanced Genius Theory in Atlanta's Creative Loafing

2010-05-11T10:19:00.000-04:00

A bit of it:

How would you sum up The Advanced Genius Theory for the uninitiated?
It started out with a simple observation. Lou Reed used to be really great, but then he got terrible. Rather than just assume that sucking was the inevitable conclusion to every artist's career, my friend Britt Bergman and I explored some alternative explanations. We seized upon one idea in particular: Maybe if Reed was ahead of his time when he was fronting the Velvet Underground, then isn't it possible that he would still be ahead of his time in the present day? And perhaps his evolution, or "advancement" as it came to be called, would be so much more pronounced that it would take longer and longer for us to understand his work.
Central to the theory is this, people were very comfortable in the 1980s saying that Bob Dylan had "lost it," that he had completely lost the sense of what is good. Our argument was that it is much more likely that you have lost it, not Dylan, based on not only his body of work, but his encyclopedic knowledge of American music. It just makes sense to me that he is on a different plane than most of us, but most people don't like it when someone is smarter than they are, so they find a reason to hate them.

Read the whole thing.

TCM's Orson Welles Film Festival

2010-05-06T10:53:00.000-04:00

From PopMatters:

On Thursday, 6 May, Turner Classic Movies will air a mini Welles film festival, featuring a few of the films that the controversial and ruthlessly ambitious Welles deigned to appear in for filthy lucre, as well as his 1941 landmark classic, Citizen Kane (showing at 5:45 PM, all times EST).

The first film in the impressive line-up, shot for RKO Pictures in 1942 from a screenplay by Welles and actor Joseph Cotten (based on a novel by influential British spy novelist Eric Ambler), is Journey into Fear (airing at 11:30 AM), described by Welles biographer and noted French film critic Andre Bazin as “a rather humorous and fantastic spy story set in Turkey” during World War II. There has been much doubt over the years, however, concerning the true director behind the film. In Orson Welles: A Critical View Bazin notes: “In theory, Norman Foster was the director of this film, with Welles producing and acting. In point of fact, it is clear that Journey into Fear is to a great extent the work of Welles, who has left his mark on the script, while numerous directorial touches bear his stamp, notably the killer’s musical motif, in which one recognizes Welles’ taste for musical effects and aural atmosphere. Moreover, after the first press show, dissatisfied with the film’s last sequence, Welles demanded and obtained permission to reshoot it.”

Welles, in case you didn't know, was seriously Advanced.

Cold Comfort: Woody Allen Interview

2010-05-05T09:02:00.000-04:00

From Commonweal (where you can read it all):

RL: When Ingmar Bergman died, you said even if you made a film as great as one of his, what would it matter? It doesn’t gain you salvation. So you had to ask yourself why do you continue to make films. Could you just say something about what you meant by “salvation”?
WA: Well, you know, you want some kind of relief from the agony and terror of human existence. Human existence is a brutal experience to me…it’s a brutal, meaningless experience—an agonizing, meaningless experience with some oases, delight, some charm and peace, but these are just small oases. Overall, it is a brutal, brutal, terrible experience, and so it’s what can you do to alleviate the agony of the human condition, the human predicament? That is what interests me the most. I continue to make the films because the problem obsesses me all the time and it’s consistently on my mind and I’m consistently trying to alleviate the problem, and I think by making films as frequently as I do I get a chance to vent the problems. There is some relief. I have said this before in a facetious way, but it is not so facetious: I am a whiner. I do get a certain amount of solace from whining.
RL: Are you saying the humor in your films is a relief for you? Or are you sort of saying to the audience, “Here is an oasis, a couple of laughs”?
WA: I think what I’m saying is that I’m really impotent against the overwhelming bleakness of the universe and that the only thing I can do is my little gift and do it the best I can, and that is about the best I can do, which is cold comfort.

Remember that the next time you're watching Bananas.

Google Number-One Image: "hippies"

2010-05-04T17:39:00.001-04:00

Above is what the Google algorithm feels is the ideal match for a search on "hippies." I think I might make this a series.

Ridiculous Guitars

2010-05-04T09:12:00.000-04:00

I wanted to see some ridiculous guitars, so I typed in "ridiculous guitars." The result? Ridiculous guitars! This site (which appears to exist solely to serve ads) has what it calls the 20 most ridiculous guitars ever, but I encourage you to do your own searches. I bring this up because I don't have anything to write about, but also because the Advanced like ridiculous guitars.

David Letterman Starts a Record Label

2010-04-30T14:07:00.000-04:00

Wake the kids and phone the neighbors (from EW):

Is David Letterman on his way to becoming a music-biz mogul? The Late Night host’s Worldwide Pants, Inc. has just started a record label called Clear Entertainment/C.E. Music. Letterman’s first signee, announced this morning via press release, is Huntington Beach, Calif. pop-punk quintet Runner Runner. Runner Runner’s self-titled debut is due late this summer on C.E. Music in partnership with Capitol and MRV. You can hear lead single “So Obvious” right now on their MySpace.

Not so excited about the band, but this is kind of interesting. Does Lou Reed still have a label?

Robert Pollard Scores Pete Rose Documentary

2010-04-30T11:32:00.000-04:00

From Spin:

"4,192, an upcoming documentary about baseball's all-time hits leader, Pete Rose, is being scored by indie-rock's all-time non-hits leader. We ask the uber-prolific ex-Guided By Voices mastermind Robert Pollard how the hell this happened and what's up with his other cinematic undertaking."

You'll have to go to Spin to read how the hell it happened.

Orson Welles Talks to Dinah Shore About Raping Audiences (Kind Of)

2010-04-30T09:14:00.000-04:00

An Advanced Genius talks about audiences to Dinah.

Lou Reed on BBC Podcast

2010-04-28T12:13:00.002-04:00

From BBC:

"In an exclusive interview Lou Reed speaks to 6 Music News' Elizabeth Alker about his 1975 album Metal Machine Music. Reed has made the decision to re-master and re-release the album, which he says is dedicated to 'the guitar as the single greatest instrument known to man.'"

I think I'll have a listen over lunch.

UPDATE: It's not available in the U.S. for some reason. Sorry about that.

Elvis Costello at the Tabernacle in Atlanta

2010-04-27T08:43:00.000-04:00

I saw Elvis Costello live for the first time last night. His lineup consisted of a violin, a dobro, accordion, mandolin and two guitars (including his). There were no drums, but they were not missed because the mix of instruments created enough percussion to roll things along. He played several covers, most notably "Femme Fatale," "Friend of the Devil" and "The Race Is On," songs from his recent album, and total reworkings of his familiar tunes, including "Alison," "What's So Funny etc." and "(The Angels Want to Wear My) Red Shoes."

He started out with a blazing version of "Mystery Train," during which the musicians traded solos, bluegrass style. I was surprised at his energy from the second he walked on the stage. I shouldn't have been, of course, as he is a professional musician and performer, so he knows how to look excited, even when he isn't. But if he was faking, I couldn't tell. The impression that I got was that this was guy in love with music and will always be happy to get a chance play for people. He also surely was energized by the talent he had on stage with him, and he let them steal the show on a number of occasions.

It got me thinking about how the Advanced (and I've been on the fence about Costello) are often criticized for reworking their hits, exploring new genres, and generally not doing what is expected of them. I think it comes down to their affection for music and the realization that they have the ability to play the songs that made them want to be musicians in the first place. All they have to do is put together some ace country musicians and suddenly George Jones and Merle Haggard tunes become possible. Costello has done just about every kind of music there is, which has probably hurt his career in terms of keeping fans, but I can't imagine he has any regrets. How could you when you get to see Jim Lauderdale and Jerry Douglas playing every night?

The show lasted about an hour and a half and really never lost steam, even as the band did some more atmospheric numbers. I haven't actually heard the album that some of the songs came from, but that didn't matter. Everything was good, covers, new tunes, familiar songs, everything. For me, "Femme Fatale" was the high point, not only because it is tied with Advancement but because it was truly beautiful (and I appreciate the southern accents in the backup singing). I halfway expected to hear a Dylan tune because I think that is the artist Costello most resembles in his career (with the exception that his voice has only grown more powerful) in that he is constantly changing and redefining himself as an artist to the point where there is no such thing, or no one thing, as an Elvis Costello sound.

If he's in your town, go see him!

Joni Mitchell: Bob Dylan Is a Fake

2010-04-23T17:52:00.000-04:00

So says digital spy:

Joni Mitchell has declared that Bob Dylan "is not authentic at all".

Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, the veteran folk singer revealed that she has little respect for the 'Blowin' In The Wind' icon, whose real name is Robert Zimmerman.

"Bob is not authentic at all. He's a plagiarist, and his name and voice are fake. Everything about Bob is a deception. We are like night and day, he and I," she said.

I think she's probably just still mad about his version of "Big Yellow Taxi."

Lou Reed and VU: Hey Babe, Take a Look at These Wild Slides

2010-04-22T09:14:00.000-04:00

I did this long ago, but I think it might help new folks understand.

Advanced Genius Theory on Facebook

2010-04-21T16:41:00.002-04:00

I just started a new group on facebook in preparation for publication. It's just like every other group, only it's Advanced.

Star Wars: Uncut

2010-04-21T14:45:00.002-04:00

Star Wars: Uncut Trailer from Casey Pugh on Vimeo.

PopMatters has something up that I think I might love. It's Star Wars: Uncut. Here's what it's all about:

They uploaded the entire movie in 15-second clips, and any aspiring film maker could claim that clip and produce a lo-fi version of that scene. The site will then compile the clips and recreate the movie in it’s entirety. It should be kind of amazing.

Make Something Cool Every Day (2009)

2010-04-21T09:29:00.002-04:00

This guy is uncommonly good.

More Metal Machine Music

2010-04-20T17:29:00.002-04:00

From Yahoo, from Reuters:

It was dismissed as "career suicide" and a joke, and some fans returned the record thinking it was faulty, but rocker Lou Reed is re-releasing a digitally remastered version of his 1975 album "Metal Machine Music." And, despite the absence of melody and vocals and the unending presence of feedback, the 68-year-old rocker best known for his work with the influential band The Velvet Underground is touring Europe playing music inspired by the record with the Metal Machine Trio. When collaborator Ulrich Krieger approached Reed and proposed the idea of analyzing the sounds of the album and performing them on stage, at first the singer was dubious. I said there's no way. That's absolutely impossible, Reed told Reuters in an interview in London ahead of a performance at the Royal Festival Hall in London and before he moves on to Paris, Brussels, Copenhagen and Oslo (www.loureed.com).

I've posted about this a lot, but I just wanted to use this as an excuse to get back to the blog. The book comes out in about four weeks, so I plan to get back to blogging every day so people new to the Theory (I expect literally tens!) will not be disappointed.

Song of the Great Kataklysm

2010-02-24T13:26:00.000-05:00

Books of Rotter, book of Rotter.

Bob Dylan Does LL Cool J (featuring Stephen Merchant)

2010-02-23T14:00:00.002-05:00

Lou Reed: I Geek Art

2010-02-22T17:59:00.003-05:00

Thanks Philco Brothers.

Shaq Curates an Art Exhibition

2010-02-22T17:37:00.003-05:00

From New York mag:

"[Shaq is] curating “Size DOES Matter,” an exhibition opening February 19 at the Flag Art Foundation in Chelsea. Shaq made 66 selections for the show—which features works ranging from the ginormous (Andreas Gursky’s billboard-size photograph Madonna I) to the microscopic (a Shaq portrait by Willard Wigan)—out of over 200 images that founder Glenn Fuhrman and director Stephanie Roach showed him over dinner after a game.

How did you make your choices?
Art is a process of delivering or arranging elements that appeal to the emotions of a person looking at it. It’s what you feel. I picked those things because they were beautiful. The thing about size—if it’s big or small you have to look at it. Because I’m so big you have to look at me. I think of myself as a monument. But sometimes I like to feel small.

Do you ever get time to visit museums?
I used to go a lot with my kids. Donald Trump is a great friend, and he has four or five Picassos on his plane. And that’s where I would look at them. One time, I was at a museum and tried touching a Picasso. You break it, you buy it, they said. I was told it would cost $2 million.

There is a lot of information to process here. But the thing I keep wondering is why it took me so long to embrace the Shaq Daddy. Maybe because he's Irish?

Gretchen Bleiler AT&T Commercial: "Perfect Day"

2010-02-22T13:38:00.001-05:00

Why not "Satellite of Love"?

Camper Van Beethoven: Sponsor a Song

2010-02-19T09:44:00.002-05:00

From techdirt:

American rock band Camper Van Beethoven is traveling to South by SouthWest this year without the support of a record label, so in order to raise funds, they're selling off the right to choose the songs that go on to their setlist for the 2 shows that they're going to play. The first 35 fans to pony up $102 get:

* A Santa Cruz Roller Derby Girl will walk/skate across the stage carrying a placard announcing your sponsorship of the song, within full view of the audience or cameras, to have the moment captured on film or video for all of eternity!

* You can have up to 4 names or one business on each placard.

Go here if you're interested in sponsoring and learning why they're doing this.

Devo Goes Corporate

2010-02-17T08:59:00.002-05:00

Devo is back, but with a new look and plan:

Casale and Mothersbaugh only hint at the group's new look, but corporate America appears to be the primary target of its social satire.
"We're playing ball with corporate society," Casale said.

The band has re-signed with Warner Brothers Records and hired an ad agency to help shape its image, he said.

"The idea was that Devo was going to turn around their reputation for being hermetically sealed and not playing ball with society," Casale said.

Instead of being an art band targeting a niche following, Devo is now using focus groups to choose which songs to include on its next CD and what clothes to wear onstage, he said.

"We want to know what you think," Casale said. "Just like CNN says 'What do you think?' We want to know."

"There's color studies going on, different costumes being shown to people, different mixes of songs, and we're letting people kind of direct us toward a final product," he said.

The goal is for Devo to "penetrate every nook and cranny of our technologically advanced pop culture in the coming year," a recent news release said. "With an arsenal of new songs, videos, fashions, apps, toys, games, live performances and more, we will reach out to create something for everybody."

What do I think? I think it's Advanced.

"All the Animals" Now a Children's Book

2010-02-11T17:52:00.003-05:00

I missed this:

Bob Dylan’s Slow Train Coming track “Man Gave Names to All the Animals” will serve as inspiration for a children’s book bearing the same name, TwentyFourBit reports. According to artist Jim Arnosky, Dylan approved the song title for use in the project, which will feature drawings inspired by Dylan’s lyrics. A CD featuring “Man Gave Names to All the Animals” will accompany the book. “From the first time I heard it, the lyrics created pictures in my mind of a land of primeval beauty,” Arnosky said in a press release. “I thought this vision would make a dream of a book, and I asked for Bob Dylan’s permission to make this dream come true. Happily, he said yes.” The song title itself references a line from Genesis 2:20, and appears on Dylan’s first Christian-influenced album Slow Train Coming, the first of three faith-based albums following Dylan’s conversion as a born again Christian.

Allowing other people to use your work (or let your work inspire other people's work in an official capacity) is Advanced. Especially in this case.

Metal Machine Music: Lou Reed Wins Again

2010-02-09T09:07:00.005-05:00

After 35 years, Metal Machine Music is finally being understood and enjoyed (NY Times):

A real-time, chamber-music performance of an inhumanly generated composition: that was Lou Reed’s “Metal Machine Music” as played by the Fireworks Ensemble at Miller Theater on Friday night. Mr. Reed recorded his 1975 album “Metal Machine Music” (RCA) by leaning guitars against amplifiers, cranking them up until the feedback screamed, playing melodies amid the sonic melee and layering and manipulating the results, including changing the tape speed of some parts. Then he chose four segments for 16-minute LP sides. It sounded like a riot in a shortwave radio factory: a fusillade of sustained, pulsating and scurrying electronic tones that adds up to a hyperactive drone, as consonant as the overtone series. It was proudly anticommercial and defiantly arty. It was Minimalistic process music at rock volume, an impersonal wall of sound. Now, 35 years later, it also sounds unexpectedly merry.

I'm guessing this means Mistrial will finally make sense in 2025 or so.

Faber Wants Morrissey Memoir, Posts an Open Letter

2010-02-03T13:10:00.002-05:00

From the Guardian (don't you ever read the Guardian, Neil?):

A Faber editor has written an open letter to Morrissey pleading with the singer to bring his "much-rumoured memoir to the House of Eliot".
Lee Brackstone, editorial director at Faber, wrote that it would be "the fulfilment of my most pressing and persistent publishing dream" if Morrissey were to pick Faber as the publisher of his autobiography. The singer and former frontman of the Smiths revealed in late 2008 that he would be writing his memoirs in order to "[set] the record straight", and in November an essay from his forthcoming autobiography was published in The Dark Monarch: Magic and Modernity in British Art, entitled "The Bleak Moor Lies".
Posting the open letter on Faber's company blog, Brackstone wrote that "forlorn as this hope may be, I can only fantasise that at least you might read my letter through and consider the pleasures and prestige of being an author at Faber, the last great family-owned independent publishing house in the western hemisphere".

And so on. Basically, I just like the picture they ran with the story (above).

"I Slept With Joey Ramone"

2010-01-28T18:00:00.002-05:00

The LA Times has a review of a new "family memoir" about Joey Ramone with the provocative title listed above. It's actually more of a synopsis, beginning with...

It's hard to remember a time when the Ramones were not, well, the Ramones. But Mickey Leigh can. Not only was he the band's first roadie and sang on their first record, he was Joey's little brother. In "I Slept With Joey Ramone" -- co-written with veteran music journalist Legs McNeil -- he traces the arc of the band's success, and his brother's role in it, in a way no one else could.

Nothing too exciting in the article, but the book could be good. Legs McNeil contributed, for what it's worth.

Val Kilmer in "MacGruber," Coming April 23

2010-01-26T15:19:00.002-05:00

See the trailer here.

Prince Gets Inspired by the Vikings

2010-01-22T17:08:00.001-05:00

From Fox:

Prince has released a new song about the Minnesota Vikings, inspired by a big win over the Dallas Cowboys and days ahead of the NFC Championship game in New Orleans.

“I saw the future,” said Prince.

Prince was in attendance for the Vikings 34-3 win. He said he went home night after the Cowboys game and wrote the song, "Purple and Gold," which he says came easy and fast.

"Purple Pride" was given exclusively to FOX 9's Robyne Robinson on Thursday. The Vikings love it and put the song on their website Friday afternoon.

Bob Dylan's Great Version of "Jokerman" on Late Night

2010-01-03T15:37:00.001-05:00

I love how chaotic this performance is, complete with search for the proper harmonica. I also like how little it has to do with the version on the record. Just great all the way around.

Donald Fagen on Jean Shepherd and A Christmas Story

2009-12-21T16:51:00.004-05:00

Nice little thing on Jean Shepherd by Donald Fagen in Slate. Shepherd was responsible for the stories that make up A Christmas Story. Here's a peak under the lampshade:

If you know Jean Shepherd's name, it's probably in connection with the now-classic film A Christmas Story, which is based on a couple of stories in his book In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash. He also does the compelling voice-over narration. On Christmas, TBS will continue its tradition of presenting a 24-hour Christmas Story marathon. There are annual fan conventions devoted to the film—released 25 years ago this Thanksgiving—and the original location in Cleveland has been turned into a museum. But long before A Christmas Story was made, Shepherd did a nightly radio broadcast on WOR out of Manhattan that enthralled a generation of alienated young people within range of the station's powerful transmitter. Including me: I was a spy for Jean Shepherd.
In the late '50s, while Lenny Bruce was beginning his climb to holy infamy in jazz clubs on the West Coast, Shepherd's all-night monologues on WOR had already gained him an intensely loyal cult of listeners. Unlike Bruce's provocative nightclub act, which had its origins in the "schpritz" of the Catskills comics, Shepherd's improvised routines were more in the tradition of Midwestern storytellers like Mark Twain, but with a contemporary urban twist: say, Mark Twain after he'd been dating Elaine May for a year and a half. Where Bruce's antics made headlines, Shepherd, with his warm, charismatic voice and folksy style, could perform his most subversive routines with the bosses in the WOR front office and the FCC being none the wiser. At least most of the time.

Read the whole thing if you've got a few minutes.

Father Christmas, Give Me a Kinks Reunion

2009-12-18T14:47:00.004-05:00

From 101.5 WQUT Tri-Cities Classic Rock:

Ray Davies has expressed interest in teaming up with brother and Kinks co-founder Dave Davies on a new project from their long-standing rock band.
Though they haven't worked together as bandmates since 1996, Ray said that a reunion was contingent upon Dave's recovery after a 2004 stroke, and whether or not he was able to play music again.
"I suggested he do some low-key shows to see how well he can play. If we're going to play together again, we can't hit the road straight away with a big-time announcement," Ray said in an interview with News of the World.
"But, if Dave feels good about it and there's good new material that we can write, it'll happen," Ray added.
Additionally, Ray said that the project could include other musical contributors as well, such as a certain New Jersey songwriting legend.
"Bruce Springsteen has expressed an interest" in the project," Ray said.

Bruce Springsteen will not be a part of this project. The Advanced are always saying that things like this will happen, but they never do. I do hope Dave can come back though.

advanced theory blog

Where Am I?

Lou Reed Creates Video for Susan Boyle

Moe Tucker: Tea Party Activist

Stephen Colbert Advanced? A Reader Wants to Know

Annoying Critics' Tricks: Zach Galifianakis Edition

Annoying Critics' Tricks: B. R. Myers Edition

Rock and Roll Hall of Fame: It's Okay, Even With All-Star Jams

Excerpt From Advanced Genius Theory: Joe Walsh

Annoying Critics' Tricks: Woody Allen Version

Tom Waits and the Internet: Death of Wonder

Excerpt From Advanced Genius Theory: Roy Orbison

Jeff Beck: A Reader Weighs In

Annoying Critics' Tricks: NY Times Review of Stephen Hawking's “The Grand Design”

Labor Day Special: My Role in the Jobless Recovery

Advanced Genius Theory: Hearts and Minds

“On the Inevitable Decline...” : The New Yorker

Soundcheck: The Advanced Genius Theory - WNYC

Soundcheck: Advancing a new theory of genius - WNYC

Why Eric Clapton Is Like Keanu Reeves in The Matrix

Paul McCartney, Lou Reed, and Egg Rolls

Reader Friedrich Nietzsche Weighs In

Steve Miller to Teach at USC

What Happened to Bob Dylan? 60 Minutes Interview

See Bob Dylan: Cash Only

More From Readers

NHL Advanced? A Reader Makes the Case

One Last Response to Mark Athitakis: What Is the Role of Critics?

Largehearted Boy Playlist: Advanced Genius Theory

Another Response to Mark Athitakis: Part Two

Another Response to Mark Athitakis: Part One

Advanced Genius Theory Pretentious?

The New Yorker Review of "Get Low": Make It Like I Would Have!

Paul Westerberg Advanced?

Ben Allen on the Advanced Genius Theory: Interview

A Response to Mark Athitakis: Part Two

I Didn't Write What I Know

A Response to Mark Athitakis: Part One

Who Really Typed Shakespeare: Bingo or Pancakes?

Review of Page 86 of A Visit From the Goon Squad

Woody Allen in the Digital Age: Still Miserable

Excerpt From Advanced Genius Theory: Mick Jagger

So My Amazon.com Review Wasn't Helpful, Huh?

Sting at Chastain Park - Concert Review

Liz Phair Wants to Be Advanced

Sting Is Pretentious (And We're Both Okay With It)

Jacobpedia Is Funny

A Note to My Next Mugger

Advanced Genius Theory Book Review

Bobcat Goldthwait to Turn Kinks Album Into Movie

The Velvet Underground - The Quine Tapes

Gorillaz & Lou Reed - Some Kind of Nature Live at Glastonbury 2010

Steve Martin's Tour Rider

Why Are Our Pirates So Depressed?

The Cambridge Companion to Schoenberg

The Week: Jason Hartley's 6 Favorite Books (Hey, That's Me!)

The Energy Solution

Advanced Genius Theory on EW Book Blog, Shelf Life

Megan Fox: The Girl With the Advanced Tattoo?

Dr. Demento Going off the Air (Sort of)

Salon on Dennis Hopper's Advancement

Advanced Genius Theory in Publishers Weekly

Advanced Genius Theory on Too Much Information

Orson Welles at Salon.com

Advanced Genius Theory in AccessAtlanta

George Lucas Writes a Letter to "Lost"

Advanced Genius Theory at Atlanta's Yacht Club (A Capella Books)

Advanced Genius Theory in the Wall StreetJournal

New Devo Album

Advanced Genius Theory in Atlanta's Creative Loafing

TCM's Orson Welles Film Festival

Cold Comfort: Woody Allen Interview

Google Number-One Image: "hippies"

Ridiculous Guitars

David Letterman Starts a Record Label

Robert Pollard Scores Pete Rose Documentary

Orson Welles Talks to Dinah Shore About Raping Audiences (Kind Of)

Lou Reed on BBC Podcast

Elvis Costello at the Tabernacle in Atlanta

Joni Mitchell: Bob Dylan Is a Fake