Democrates, Unite!

Finally, after a long grueling battle between Obama and Clinton, there's a nominee.

Even better, Clinton is throwing her full support to Obama, a good move on her part, and a move that will hopefully patch up the cracks between her supporters and Obama's supporters.

Now the question is: Who will be Obama's running partner?

The first thing that I heard is that Clinton would be the ideal choice. From the beginning, I thought that Obama and Clinton '08 would be groovy, but then their rivalry became so tense that it was almost impossible to imagine the scenario. But the short period before Obama's win , this tension has somehow seemed to eased a bit. And now with Clinton's endorsement, it suddenly seems like these two can patch things up.

Of course, that will be Obama's decision. If he does run with Clinton, the supporters of Clinton will probably turn their heads and support him, the angry women that were so disappointed after Clinton's loss will once again vote for the Democrats.To make up his lack of votes from White women, older people, working class, and Hispanics, it seems like the best strategy will be asking Clinton to run with him. But on the other hand, the Clinton-haters that despited Bill Clinton, and sequentially hated Hilary Clinton, will probably be ticked off by this. Obama's message of change might even be overshadowed if he brought on Clinton, since Clinton doesn't exactly fit the "new politic" stance that Obama stood behind.

It's now five months till the November election, Obama needs to make a good choice.

On the other hand, who does McCain wants to go with?

Giving Us "The Slip"

Well, there's finally an album that's "100% free".

On the early hours of May 5th, Nine Inch Nails gave the world "The Slip", a 10 track album acting "as a thank you to our fans for your continued support, we are giving away the new nine inch nails album one hundred percent free, exclusively via nin.com."

Unlike that other band that released a "free" album last year (folks, it's not completely free), "The Slip" seems like a more considerate and better served album than "In Rainbows". For one, there are several options with the quality of the tracks, and all of them are high-quality. There's artwork included in a PDF, shoot, they even give you the lyrics embalmed in the songs, so no need to purchase a CD for better quality or artwork of the album. And it's released under Creative Commons, so you can remix it and use it freely for noncommercial usage. The music ain't bad either: it's a blend of noise and melodies, music ranges from pretty piano ("Lights in the Sky"), to sullen ambient ("Corona Radiata").

And Reznor also offers the hard copy in CD form in July too, so that's good news for those of us that likes to have a physical copy.

Reznor's activities and antics lately brings contrast to another band that are credited with so much fanfare and "innovation": Radiohead. It was quite funny that the press will say a band has "pulled a Radiohead" whenever someone distributes music online. Sure, Radiohead was the first major artist to do this kind of online distribution, and they should be acknowledged. But it seems like that they're not completely comfortable with online distribution, and has no plans of further developing their method of online distribution.
The Thom Yorke said that "In Rainbows" was just a "one-off". Certainly, I was disappointed when I heard the news, but not surprised. I was a bit irritated that to remix "Nude", you have to pay for its stems, I mean, Radiohead has the potential and talent to be trail-blazers in this new digital world, but they don't want to reiterate themselves into the "In Raibows" world again. But who knows, Thom Yorke and Co. might try their hands on other interesting methods.

Oh well, there's still Reznor. He's fully believed in the whole concept of "digital distribution is the future", and has become a true innovator. The times are a-changing, and Reznor is taking his place as one of the first leader.

Indecision '08

Now that the showdown between Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama is over, you would think that things would be more clear. But actually, the answer to the "who is going to get the Democratic nomination" question has only gotten more muddy.


Clinton
Even though Hilary Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary on Tuesday, I don't think it's a "big win". With 55% of the vote, Clinton certainly gained the momentum she needs to continue this race, but it's not a win so impressive that put her in first either. Her total delegate counts are still behind Obama, even though Clinton has more superdelegates under her belts now. She and Obama are basically going head to head, and this win in Pennsylvania only adds to her potential in the race. Hilary now has the reason to run, and the competition between her and Obama will probably have to be settled by the super delegates.

Obama
Perhaps the whole "Reverend Wright" thing has struck Obama deep, since now not only the public associates Obama with an extremist, but now Obama is more vulnerable to the attack from his opponents. In fact, there's already a a pretty negative ad in North Carolina. Then his "bitter" remark got his opponents going again. Even though polls indicated that his remark did not hurt him, he lost nevertheless.

So now the Democrats are stuck with no clear winner, and it is unclear about who is "best" for the party.

Electability
Both Clinton and Obama will be subjected to negative campaigns by the Republicans no matter who is the nominee. Clinton has the Lewinsky thing, her past voting records, and her image to worry about. While Obama has Reverend Wright, inexperience, Muslim conspiracies to worry about. Clinton has won the bigger and more populated states while Obama has won the smaller states. Some argue that Clinton will have a bigger chance to get the bigger states in November, and that will lead the Democrats into victory. Some argue that Obama will be more appealing than Clinton to both the young and the undecided votes. I honestly do not have a preference right now of who should be the nominee.

The fact of the matter is that the super delegates will probably get their hands on deciding who the nominee should be. From the beginning, I thought the super delegates are not the best idea to get the nominee, since it basically ignored the popular votes and lets public "democracy" goes out the door. It's quite unappealing that a few hundreds of powerful members gets to make the big decision (kind of like oligarchy, isn't it?) while the previous delegates goes to waste.

Well, while this is all going on, McCain is just sitting back and laughing.

Oh, My Media

Of course most of the people in the West had heard about the Tibetan and human rights activists protesting in London, Paris and San Francisco during the Beijing Olympics Torch Relay. But while the camera of the West turned mostly to Pro-Tibet protesters, how many actually give the same coverage to the Chinese supporters who were waving the red flag on the sideline?

Right after the riots in Lhasa, the media immediately jumped and talked about the cruelty and the bloodshed that the Chinese police brought upon the Tibetan protesters, some even calling it "peaceful protests" on the Tibetan's part. Right, tearing down buildings, burning shops, and attacking the Hans are really peaceful. While reading the newspapers and sites of the West, I realized that they mostly focused on the Tibetans, and many did not mention the Hans that were attacked, injured, and those Hans that were killed by the rioters. Well, maybe I'm not paying close enough attention.

Then,media of the West began using various misinformation when reporting the Lhasa riots. Cropping our the violent part from the picture so it seems like the Chinese police are cracking down on the Tibetans (CNN), identifying the Nepal police as Chinese police (Germany), and saying an ambulance is a police car (BBC). I'm quite baffled by their "professionalism", and to see more of these "honest mistakes", you should see this video that was complied by the Chinese students in the West:


Then it comes the torch relays, protesters dominated the Western press, I didn't really know that there were Chinese supporters in London and Paris until I read the Chinese newspaper.Well, maybe I didn't pay enough attention again. Soon because of this, Chinese nationalism is rising, to the point of extreme. Boycotting CNN and French goods, and in one case, Chinese students are actually threatening another Chinese student of being a "traitor" in a gathering of both sides. Most of it went on unnoticed by the Western media, and it only makes the Chinese even more angry.

Well, now they actually does report the rallies by the Chinese supporters, but the catch is in its title: "Anti-French rallies across China", such a good title to depict Chinese supporters, isn't it?

Some Quick Words on the Tibetan Uprising and the Olympics

Everyone had heard about it by now, Minorities in Tibet are protesting and violently rioting on the streets of Lhasa. And it seems like it's not stopping.

I've been exposed to both the Chinese media and the Western media about the news. Both have their own distinct tone and view, and I don't trust both. The Western media will always have a negative light on China, and China's media is government-controlled. With this say, I honestly don't know what side I'm on.

With this wave of violent protest, I wonder if the Olympics will be as smooth as the government promised. And there's this sort of sadness in me to see this, since as a Chinese myself, I'm proud that China had actually have the opportunity to host the Olympics. To see people considering boycotting the Olympics and seeing people using this opportunity to act violently seems a bit...disheartening.

Some people did not get why the Chinese government cared about the Olympics so much. Well, the Chinese cared about it so much is because of national pride. China was a country that was oppressed by the West and was invaded by Japan, its people have suffered humility and oppression for a long time. Well, now it's the time for China to shine, for China to show off its wealth. To prove to the world that it's no longer a country of regression but a country of progression. It's not just about the Chinese in China, it's also about people like me, immigrants that are far away from their homeland to feel (somewhat vicariously)like they're part of a strong nation.

It will certainly be interesting to see how China will handle the Olympics. I'll be watching closely, whether people boycott it or not. Then again, my opinion is not objective either.

Oh My God, It’s Ghosts!

My Story

A week ago at around 9:00 PM, I was among the many NIN fans that screamed “oh my God!” into their computer screens. That’s right, Nine Inch Nails actually released an album, I mean, albums, online last Sunday.


Reznor had been hinting on something big for a couple of weeks prior to the release of Ghosts I-IV. At around 7:10 PM on March 2nd, he posted “2 hours” on his blog, I was expecting something by the 9’0 clock hour, but not something this big.

When I connected to www.nin.com at about 9:00 PM, the site changed pretty drastically. And more importantly, there was the text that said “Ghosts I-IV is available RIGHT NOW” on my computer screen.

I froze for a second to take it all in, but then I immediately went to the fan forum, and of course, people exploded. I typed in some inane comments about how excited I was and went straight to nin.com to get my hands on Ghosts.

But alas, it was not that easy.

I was able to cruise past the options page that listed all the editions that you can choose from. I clicked on the $10.00, 2 CD option and tried to proceed, but the pages after that couldn’t even load. Apparently most of the people have the same problem as me, because the site was so congested with people trying to order. The early birds that did get their order through reported that they have trouble downloading the files. It was chaos and confusion.

Then we came to the conclusion that we broke the NINternet , LOL.

However, I did managed to listen to the few selected tracks at AinR, and I was delighted with new music. After I calmed down a bit, I read more into the release: it is a 36 tracks instrumental album described as “music for daydream”.

Dude, that’s trippy.

I had the burning desire to own the album, to listen to it, so I went over to Amazon to buy the album for $5.00. Loaded it into my iPod, and I was amazed at the variety, the texture, and the depth.

I was able to get my order through the next day after one failed attempt. But problems didn’t end there, even though I received my receipt, my download link is nowhere to be seen (as I’m writing this, I still don’t have the download link). But I let that go, because I already got a MP3 version and managed to snatch the Apple Lossless version that I wanted from somewhere else. I got what I paid for, even though it wasn’t from the download link.

Here Comes the Analytical Stuff
The first thing that the press said about this release was that NIN pulled a “Radiohead”. While it is an acceptable analogy, there are some significant differences.

One, this is not a pay-what-you-want method. Even though there are variety of options for the customers to choose form, Ghosts have a set price. It’s offering different packages too, and this distribution method seemed more well-thought out than In Rainbows.

In Rainbows seemed more about donation, Ghosts seemed more about business.

Reznor is not giving the whole thing away for free (theoretically), instead, he used the method of free-samples to get people to buy it. he offered 9 songs for the free (through BitTorrent, no less) to build interests. He seemed more cautious after Niggy Tardust , and takes the mind of a businessman.

He took time to make this a worthy and fair purchase also: for $5.00, you get 36 songs, a PDF, and DRM-free, high quality files in the format that you want. One of In Rainbows’s complaints were bad quality, well, Reznor’s effort solves that.

Reznor is a vocal advocate for online distribution, and he’s a good man for taking a step. While he is not the first one to try online distribution (no, the first one is NOT Radiohead, they’re the first big act to do that), I think that he offered the best method so far. Business-wise. That is not to say that his method this time is perfect: the servers didn’t do their jobs right.

Of course, due to high volume of downloads, their site crushed, and people started screaming that their downloads doesn’t work. Perhaps it was poor-planning on their part, or perhaps they underestimated their fanbase.

But he fact that the site crushed and that they sold out their $300 edition under 2 days is a good sign, this means that they have business. People are coming in and giving him money. The downloads of Ghosts were ranked high in torrent sites, even if they didn’t get people’s money, they got their ears.

And here’s a larger question: will this method work for others? Yes and no. for big and well established bands, I think this plan would work fine. There’s your cheap and worthy download at a low price for the poor and the casual fans, and there’s your expensive deluxe edition for the hardcore.

For unknown and the smaller bands, I think the Radiohead method works better. The donation-esque method is not as imposing. Even a low set-price may drive away customers because they don’t know the band and are not familiar with the music, a $5.00 may sounds outrageous to them for an unknown band, I would think it’s better for them to donate according to their own will. Donating and buying is two different things. You also don’t need extra accessories like quality and PDF to satisfy your customer (but it would be nice), since the general expectation is lower for things like that with a smaller band. They don’t have the fanbase for deluxe editions either (at least not for $300), a simple release should be able to do the trick.

But who knows what the future holds? More well-known artists have to participate in order for us to imagine how things will be.

Change vs. Experience ’08 (Stephen Colbert Should Run for President for Real)

It’s a topic that I have not yet write about: The presidential race.

Well, that’s kind of a lie, I just didn’t have the guts to express my opinions on the Internet yet, the arguments are so passionate and tense that I was afraid to throw my hat in. Since no one reads this blog, I can say whatever and not get call an idiot.

Okay, enough chattering:

If I were to vote today, at this moment, I would vote for Hilary Clinton. Even though this statement is practically useless, because Massachusetts already had its primary, and I can’t vote anyways. But that is not going to stop me from having an opinion, it’s impossible to not have an opinion about this race.

Arguably, the 2008 presidential race is one of the most important race so far. It certainly has the most diverse candidates, and its stakes are high: Americans are choosing the next victim to clean up the Iraqi mess (or if you’re McCain, stay in the Iraqi mess), spur up the economy, fight the terrorists, and millions of other things.

The democrats have tow candidates that, if elected, will be making American history in being the first female/ black president. Both are promising to me, both have values that fits my view (Kucinich’s views matched with mine the most, it’s a shame that he was under the radar). But I will vote for Hilary if given the chance because I trust “experience” over “hope”.


Obama

I seem like the oddball in my age group, since most of the young people like Obama. They want change, they need change, they have the optimism for change. Obama embodies hope, his campaign is based on the promise of change. People are sick of the direction that America was headed (and still is), there was a sort of desperation to change things. Obama, with no old political ties, only in the Senate for three years, there seem to be this “hipness” associated with him too. People are afraid that the White House is going to fall to another politician with the same old ties like Bush, afraid that the new president will promote the same agenda, the same policies, and the same relations. Well, Obama is the new fresh light, and he is going to bring change, buddy!

Or, if you’re cynical like me, you might think that change is not gonna come easy. You might pick Clinton’s experience.

Clinton

I admit, being a female myself can be subjective in choosing who to support.
Clinton seemed like a confident, strong and firm woman. This can be seen as her strongest and weakest quality. It may bring admiration or the “hey, she ain’t womanly enough, biiittch” thing. I talked with an adult friend of mine who supports Clinton, and she mentioned that people didn’t like Clinton because she’s a woman. A friend of mine who supports Obama mentioned that Clinton is a “bitch".

Is this reality? Politic is a man’s game, you have to be perceived as strong. But in being strong, you get call a bitch. Then there’s Bill Clinton, maybe people are afraid that the First Husband will run things instead, I don’t know.

Clinton’s slogan is “experience”, yes, she has it. But with having the experience, she has the ties also. Perhaps this is why the Obama supporters chose Obama: they don’t want ties. They don’t want ties to corporations, they don’t want ties to old politicians.

But without ties, how much change can one brings?

Now, I’m no politician, but I don’t think change is that easy. Politics is a dirty and intricate game, with no ties and no experience, just how much can actually change? Clinton and Obama seemed to agree on the important points, and it seemed like a “safer” choice to have someone who have experience and ties to bring these changes.


Republicans

McCain and Huckabee (I have to admit, President Huckabee will be one hell of a hilarious title) are left. I’m pretty sure McCain is going to get the nomination. I just pray that he doesn’t choose Huckabee as running mate.

I’ll give props to McCain in being firm on his position on the War in Iraq. But dude, you can go to Iraq and fight the war yourself if you want to continue.

Conclusion

Currently Obama is leading in the delegates, and he had a long string of victories. It’s a tight race, at one point or another it seemed like all the candidates have the upper hand. Who will ultimately win the nominations and elected as the new president of this beautiful land? I don’t know. Right now, Obama seems to be getting somewhere, if he wins the nomination, I will support him.

Once the nominations are given, that’s when the mud-slinging begins.I hope they don't use something like this.

Who knows, if we’re lucky, we will get another Republican Caucasian man in the White House, and stay in Iraq for a hundred years.

Last but not least, I want to post this heart-warming picture that has nothing to do with anything:

These People are Unbelievable

Just another example of how fucking crazy, hateful, intolerant, and arrogant these religious nuts are: that infamous God Hates Fags site is once again ranting about their hatred and trying to justify the shooter at Northern Illinois University in this "News Release":

Thank God for the Shooter at Northern Illinois Univ.
God sent the Shooter. In His Wrath & Vengeance Against an Ungrateful Nation that has Forsaken Him &Embraced Filthy Fags.
WBC will picket their hypocritical funerals & memorials & “vigils.”
Yes. In religious protest & warning; to wit: “Be not deceived; God is not mocked.” Gal. 6:7.
God Hates Fags! & Fag-Enablers. Ergo, God hates fag-dominated Northern Illinois Univ.,fag-saturated Illinois, and fag-run America. What part of this 12-word sentence don’t you idiots understand? “Thou shalt not lie withmankind, as with womankind; it is abomination.”
Lev. 18:22.

People are unbelievable. How dare you try to justify your own hatred using this national tragedy? Are you so arrogant and and feels so self-important to think that God is trying to avenge your little homophobic and intolerant club? I can't even understand them.

If there is a God, I seriously doubt that he will hate homosexuals, and he would certainly be against your kind of intolerance and utter hatred. But if God is anything like you described or believed to be, a God that hates homosexuals, hates non-believers, and damns anyone that has a sense of their own mind, and sends a shooter to punish them, then fine, I'm happy I'm an atheist.

Seriously, fuck off.

The Cloverfield Monster is a Giant Squirrel

No, it's not. I'm just kidding.

I saw "Cloverfield" yesterday afternoon, more out of curiosity than actual fandom from following the ARG. I wasn't expecting a lot from the movie, since "monster movie" doesn't translate into "great" for me. But fuck it, with all the hype, I'm going to see this thing.

And it exceeded my expectation.

The first 20 minutes or so was some mild background story-telling, setting up the story line. Then,it got violent fast. Fires, buildings falling, screaming, running, it all turned into destruction and panic. The movie was filled with intensity and adrenaline, a total thrill ride. There was a few surprises in the movie also, like the fact that the Cloverfield monster is not alone.

The only thing that I could come up with as complains were that the whole "told from the perspective of the hand-held camera" thing was a bit too much. After a while, I felt a bit dizzy, and my stomach felt a bit weird afterwards, because there was so much scrambling and shaking. But I do think that the perspective was refreshing and made the film looked more realistic. Also, the ending was a bit irresolute to me, it didn't really explain anything about the monster.

But that's not the point, is it? The movie was more about destruction, not explanation. With destruction, the movie did a good job.

Also, after poking around, I found that I missed at least two pretty interesting thing from the movie: the whisper at the end of the credits, which when you listen to it in reverse, it said "it's still alive". And at the end of the movie with the old footage from the camera, there was something falling from the sky into the water near Coney Island. So, maybe that gives some clues to how the monster came to be?

"Cloverfield" was a thrill ride for me, I will definitely get this on DVD.

When You're Really Bored (Make Your Own Calendar) II

Well, might as well post the other pictures of my calendar in the making. Though as of right now, I don't think they will become calendar pages, but it will become part of my drawing portfolio of sorts.


Queens of the Stone Age's Era Vulgaris backcover.

Picture inside of Radiohead's OK Computer booklet.


Cover of Arcade Fire's Funeral


Picture inside of Arcade Fire's Funeral album jacket (whatever it called).



Inside the album jacket of NIN's Year Zero

A Few Words on the Saul Williams Stats

As said before,in October Trent Reznor announced that the Saul Williams album Niggy Tardust will be a digital release, which you can get it for free or "donate" five bucks. Well, unlike Radiohead, who is all secretive about the stats of their In Rainbows "experiment", Trent Reznor announced the stats on the Niggy Tardust album. To quote:

"Saul’s previous record was released in 2004 and has sold 33,897 copies.

As of 1/2/08,
154,449 people chose to download Saul’s new record.
28,322 of those people chose to pay $5 for it, meaning:
18.3% chose to pay.

Of those paying,

3220 chose 192kbps MP3
19,764 chose 320kbps MP3
5338 chose FLAC"

These data at first disheartened me a bit, since I paid $5.00 without any considerations and couldn't quite fathom why 81.7 % of people chose to pay nothing. Does people really see no value in music anymore in the age of piracy? I even posted on a messageboard about whether musicians should even consider the "free" option.

BUT, after reading other people's thinking and thinking it a bit myself, I guess my first reaction was wrong. People are going to get it for free if they want to, it's getting easier and being justified more and more and there is no point anymore in trying to make people pay for music anymore. While 18% is a bit low in my opinions, others said that it's still making a good profit. Yes, they make more than $140,000 on this so far, but you have to take into account the expenses involved with making a record. According to Reznor, this record didn't sound like it's made in a cheap studio with some cheap engineers. Then there is the point of "well, this record gain Williams more fanbase than he ever had"(with Reznor acknowledged at the end of his post). While I do agree this may be a long-term investment, but I guess the essence of Reznor's post was about what others can expect from a distribution method like this, and how much cash they can make from it.

And I guess these statistics will not apply to ALL the others that will come after them. The Saul Williams situation is a bit unique: He is an obscure artist, with a major artist backing him. I would expect that most of the people who downloaded this album (like myself) are NIN fans, and didn't want to risk $5.00 for something that they don't know if they will like or not, because hey, they want that $5.00 to buy a cup of Starbucks coffee, goddamnit.

There are some many more factors contributed to the results as it is. Just scroll around messagboards and comment sections and you will see the whole convention of people discussing it. Do these stats say alot? I don't know, I guess we will have to see more stats from different artists. But it's laudable that Reznor posted his stats and shared it with people. It's not clear how much Saul Williams and Reznor had make on this record, but the record is still online, and there will still be people downloading it and (maybe) pay for it.

But whatever distribution method figure out in the future, it seems that you should expect the majority of the people to get it for free, and a minority of them to pay for it.

Attack of the Radioheads

Seriously, does every end of the year "Best Albums" list has to have Radiohead's In Rainbows as #1?

The totally innovative, out of this world and brilliant method of distribution * must have blown everyone's mind, and let this overshadows the music. Not that I hated In Rainbows, but I just never find it so excruciatingly amazing. Maybe it was because everyone went on and shouts: "OMG, In Rainbows is totally fucking awesome!" because that sort of stuff tends to annoy me and alienates me. I tried to love In Rainbows and "get it", but I just never did. Sorry. I completely understands that some people truly loves this fucking record, but I just didn't get the big deal about the music**.It's certainly better than a lot of crap that came out this year, but was it really that extraordinary and such a masterpiece? Maybe it was because I'm not sophisticated enough to like +(some) songs that has no hooks and no dynamics. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks that this album was so fucking overrated.

And now every time I read that In Rainbows is #1, I just roll my eyes. And if any Radiohead fans reads this, they probably wants to curse me. Hey, I'll still buy the CD version of In Rainbows and continues to like Radiohead, but shut up about
"In Rainbows is not only the best album of the year, but maybe the decade."


*This statement was totally exaggerated and sarcastic.
** Despite saying this, I will continue listen to "In Rainbows" and try to "get it".
+ This is not to say that all of the songs have no hooks and no dynamics.

RIP Bhutto

When I heard about Bhutto's death last night, I was shocked. Even though I figure that she will be assassinated sooner or later, but it still came as a shock.

I'll admit I'm no expert on the going ons in Pakistan. But somehow, there was some sort of sadness after I heard her death. With her death, Pakistan is going to be even more chaotic and violent,the future of elections will be unclear and whether Musharraf will benefit from this is still hard to say. And Bhutto was a strong woman, and it seemed to me that she was not afraid to die. Maybe my reaction to her death was more of a sympathetic approach than a political one.

As my mother heard about it, she said: "another legend has fallen."

The grim reaper always get someone before the year ends.

When You're Really Bored (Make Your Own Calendar)

During the Christmas break from school, I basically have nothing to do. As the new year approaches, I became really bored and began to do crazy things. Like making a calendar myself, with album arts that I re-drew as visuals.

I can't quite remember how this idea came to me, it was one of those things that just jumps out. It didn't occur to me there wasn't a lot of great album art that I can draw from. Most of the albums that I own have some really simple and/or abstract art that was not easy to recreate. But I did managed to pick out a few, here is four of them:

The cover from Nine Inch Nails' Year Zero
The reason I drew this was mostly because it's one of the only album cover that has some sort of clear image on it. After I drew it, it looked too plain, and still weird.


And here's my favorite one, the cover of Era Vulgaris by Queens of the Stone Age. It's easy to draw and it's an interesting picture.I guess this was the album cover that gave me the idea of doing a calendar with album arts.


Another one that was great to draw because it's distinguished and interesting was the album cover of In the Aeroplane Over the Sea by Neutral Milk Hotel. I love the drum-faced lady, it's creepy in a good way.


The fourth one is also from In the Aeroplane Over the Sea, this time is the back cover. I'm running out of materials, but it's an awesome picture to draw.


I'll be drawing more, next stop should be some pictures inside the booklet of OK Computer. Yay!

Merry X-Mas to Me

I don't celebrate Christmas.

I don't get bummed out either, I kind of see it as kind of like a burden being lifted.

Christmas is so commercialized right now, at some points it seemed to me that it wasn't so much about the birth of Christ, but just about getting presents. It seems like it is inevitable that you must buy a ton of presents for everyone in order to celebrate this Holy Birth. What does Santa Clause have to do with baby Jesus anyway?

I see students in school dragging bags of presents for their friends and whatnot,even though a part of me was thinking: "It's kind of awesome that they get all kinds of presents," but ultimately I wasn't jealous. I didn't have to go Christmas shopping, spent time thinking who should get what, contemplating how big a budget I have and how much I have left.

Several years back I brought ton of cards to give to friends, but right now, I gave one physical card to a friend, and just gave e-cards to the rest.The closest thing I had as Christmas shopping was buying three books for free-time reading over the holiday break .To match the holiday spirit, I brought The Road by Cormac McCarthy, a tale about a father and a son making a post-apocalyptic journey South. 1984 and Animal Farm by George Orwell, both cannot be categorized as Christmasy.

So because I'm an atheist, I have no Christmas obligations. I guess (a little) money in my pocket is a Christmas gift for me.

Early-Internet Life Crisis

The Internet, a tool and space that is integral part of modern life. A data base so vast and great that it contains unlimited knowledge. A space open for everyone and anyone to share everything and anything. It's great, but with every great thing, there's a downside.

Because people can seal their identities and face, they can take on a alternate personality of sort, and just exploit the potential of being anonymous.Trolls, internet bullies, stalkers, you know it. There are gossip boards and message boards where rumors flies. People can prowl into other people's lives. The net is infested with all sorts of people.

That is why I don't have a MySpace or Facebook, nor do I expose a large portion of my personal life. But once or twice I get fed-up with the Internet, since I prowl the Internet and sees all sorts of things described above. Shoot, I can feel my integrity draining as read some of things on a gossip board. Why do people insist on tearing into the personal lives of celebrities or whatnot, and willingly talk trash and lies about a person if they have only seen their public persona and never know them in person? Why do people attack others relentlessly?

And more importantly, why did I read those things in the first place and be thinking and bothered by them? They weren't talking about me, nor do I have any interest in joining their discussion about whatever-the-fuck. Curiosity kill the cat, and sometimes I got dragged into it.

Sometimes I seriously thought I would be much happier if I don't know half the stuff I know and read.

I'm Such A Masochist

I have a habit of reading comments below articles. It's so painful to read yet somehow I can't look away. A few spots that brings out the most entertaining commentators (in no particular order):

Blabbermouth.net
Example:

COMMENT | WOO-HOO GIGANTOUR!!!posted by : MRBIGTIME
12/8/2007 5:16:17 PM

PLEASE,PLEASE LET IT BE TESTAMENT-SLAYER-METALLICA-EXODUS- OVERKILL. \M/ MEGADAVE!!! \M/

Well, this is not the worse I've read, but it's the one that I found that qualifies as over-the-top. Then there's one post where someone who posted the same comment like 40 times...But the real haters and crazies come out when a news band that is not "metal".


Youtube.com
Example:
Ramox3 (13 minutes ago) Show Hide Marked as spam
-1 Poor comment Good comment

(Reply) (Spam)
bad smell is not muslims u dumbass its Indians (some of them) muslims have to wash 5 times a day and are required to shower frequently. Mohamad PBUH said:" Hyegien is part of faith"

I don't know what to say. It's easy to find this kind of comments on YouTube. There's more posts that are more maniacal than this, but I'm too lazy to look through the 39,162 comments to find the dumbest comment.


PerezHilton.com
I don't read the site. This is only the third (or something )time I visited the site. I read the comments under this post, as it were linked to a site that I frequent, and was instantly amazed.
Example:

david-0-selznick says – reply to this
i wonder what his balls smelll like at the moment this pic was taken. I rubb mine at the gym and sniff my hand.

LOL. Then there are a whole fangirl reaction to Reznor being hot. I didn't dare to read the comments under the other posts, but do people on PerezHilton always rave about how a celebrity is hot and how they want to fuck them?


nin.com
Now, I love the blog thing that the site does now, but the comments are scary.
Example
Anonymous said...

ok. I'm going to just say it already. trent, you are coming off gay. are you trying to let us know your gay? or bi? it's ok to be bi or gay. I have bi and gay friends. anyway. first you have that video with the guy drinking from a coffee mug with a nude guy on it and now a pic of a guy siting on your sofa with your dogs. are you going to come out of the closet? I'm sure male and female fans will still like you and nin and buy your music if you admit your bi or gay.

What the fuck? Why is the comments to every post have some sort of speculation about Reznor's sexuality? Then there's the people talking about mortgages and how much that want to have sex with Reznor. God. I would not be sad if the comment section on nin.com gets removed.


And ultimately, it's my fault that I read those comments, and spent time talking about them. I still have to do my homework.

And There's the Grammys...

This is a bit late, but, I got to say it: The Grammys suck.

It's predictable and totally commercialized. The Grammys does not recognize musical talents but musical commerce. Whatever is on the radio gets nominated. Whoever is the buzz that year gets nominated. Those established Grammy favorites gets nominated every time. I've realized a while ago that the Grammys are irrelevant,it's just a spectacle for the media and give a chance for the labels to pat themselves on the back.

So let see who's nominated:
Amy Winehouse is everywhere this year, so of course she gets 8 nominations. Kanye West won the sale contest with 50 Cents, so he gets nominated. Beyonce, check. Justin Timberlake, check. Fergie, Check. Nickelback, check. Daughtry, check. What you hear on the radio is what you get.

Then there's that awful "Hey There Delilah", and Foo Fighters got some pretty high nominations. I like the Foo Fighters, but "Album of the Year" ? "Best Rock Album"? Foo Fighter's average album is the best, huh? Well, it's better than Daughtry.

Whatever, LOL.

Gem of the Day: Courtney Love's Blog

When I first came across one of Courtney Love's blog postings (on moonwashrose.com), I was absolutely fascinated by it. Not by how well-written or how it resonates with people, but by how it was so incoherent and how Courtney Love posts about personal things. Her posts were just simply a rant, a long rant filled with grammatically errors and spelling mistakes.

Then I came across her post again today, that post was linked to Sputnik Music, and she talked about Radiohead. While I'm sure she has some very in-depth thoughts on the Radiohead distribution plan, I couldn't understand 1/5 of her post. This is her original post:

Originally Posted by Courtney
as for radiohead= they didcnt jump off a REAL clifff, they bungee jumped you KNOW the kamikaze pilot in me wnats to do the same dfamm thing excapt wuith my a lsit mnaterial, with the real thing- theyve made 9.7 m,illion in 3 weeks this way and its live junk-= not junk as radioheaddoesnt really amke JUNK but its live - most of it heard before( wich youve all heard liveversaionbs of things veryvery different than non live versions of things) i really think it couldf work do all my magazine covers in january - so the lead time in there kamikaze thropugh my junket my oprah my tv **** n the 2 week leaD UP and just jump of f that cliff i love doing things really first im greatful for radiohead for making the first move- id do it differentlyt -= thats why b sides are no longer b sisdes but have to be a sides to an extent-= cos theyre EXTRA TRACKS now wich can mean up to 500k to such and such sponsor coty./my space etc. ... i justthinjk offering about 10 songs but your best for "free" witha what am i worth sign not just NINs cast offs i mean yopur a sides- i don t know im percolating- i love risk and most everything ive ever done well has been because everyone said iw as crazy to do it-= thazts why words liek "risk management" and Rime management:" are4 resonating with me now.

Huh? What is she talking about here? I can sort of figure out that she said she appreciates Radiohead doing their "free" download thing, and something about a-sides or b-sides, something about NIN castoffs, and something about money. But other than that, I'm not smart enough to understand her.

And after looking around, I found a generous person translated Courtney Love's post in a language that I (sort of ) understand:

Originally Posted by Courtney Love Talks Radiohead
As for Radiohead: they didn't jump off a real cliff; they bungee jumped. You know the kamikaze pilot in me wants to do the same damn thing except with my A-list material, with the real thing. They've made 9.7 million in 3 weeks this way, and it's live junk—not junk, as Radiohead doesn't really make junk, but it's live—most of it heard before (which you've all heard live versions of things very, very different than non-live versions of things).

I really think it could work—do all my magazine covers in January so the lead time is there, kamikaze through my junket, my Oprah, my TV shit in the 2 week lead-up and just jump off that cliff. I love doing things really fast, I'm grateful for Radiohead for making the first move—I'd do it differently.

That's why b-sides are no longer b-sides but have to be a-sides to an extent, 'cause they're extra tracks now which can mean up to 500k to such and such sponsor company/MySpace, etc. I just think offering about 10 songs but your best for "free" with a 'what am I worth' sign—not just NIN's castoffs, I mean your a-sides—I don't know, I'm percolating. I love risk, and most everything I've ever done well has been because everyone said I was crazy to do it. That's why words like "risk management" and "time management" are resonating with me now.

Okay Courtney. And yes, I totally bookmarked your MySpace.

The Canterbury Tales

The Canterbury Tales

Wordsworth, William. 1888. Complete Poetical Works.
http://www2.cs.uregina.ca/~barnard/01coming.html
http://www2.cs.uregina.ca/~barnard/idylls.html
http://www.poetry-portal.com/styles9.html