Tuesday, November 11, 2014

for the person that asked...

cevin key = seven kilograms (of pot) = kevin crompton.

the story is they worried about people being confused that they were both named kevin, so they came up with pseudonyms.

deathtokoalas
if anything, it's more true that reznor took a substantial amount of his sound from die warzau (or the chicago wax trax sound in general).


there's actually a bit of a link there, with chris vrenna - who was in die warzau before he was in nine inch nails (although he already knew reznor).
he's clearly an actor...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeykDZnZa3M

i think this makes a valid and accurate point. i've been trying to find a way to articulate myself with this and have been largely unsuccessful and consequently haven't. part of the reason might be that the simplicity of the pop form is not able to provide for the subtlety that is required in the discussion. it's one thing to talk of it setting off a discussion rather than getting a concrete message across, but i feel that the song is maybe so blurry in it's messaging that it's not able to even specify what the starting point is. so it's not easy to produce a defined reaction when it's not clear what it is that ought to be reacted to.

i think this is the crux of it: before you get into analyzing or criticizing the original video or the response to it, you have to understand that fat v. skinny is a false binary. it's one thing to point out that there's a lot of unrealistic messaging and it's a cause in continuing the problem of eating disorders (which are substantial). it's another to point out that "body positivity" is just as often used as an excuse for unhealthy people to stay unhealthy, promoting the continuing obesity epidemic (which is statistically a far greater public health issue). putting pressure on overweight people to be more healthy is not the same thing as enforcing an unrealistic beauty standard.

so, is the song a criticism of the enforcement of beauty norms (which would be a good thing), is it a "fat anthem" (which would be a bad thing) or is it in truth too simplistic and vague to be specific and is consequently being interpreted as both, creating confusion as to how to respond to it?


sometimes, when things are complicated it's because they're vague rather than because they're specific.

personally? i get more of a "fat anthem" feel out of it, and i'm not really comfortable with upholding that as a "positive message".
listen: i wouldn't put it past the advertising executives that work for monster to try to tap into this. some of this may really not be a coincidence; satan's been the hippest shit out there for well over two generations, now.

it seems like the consensus is, indeed, "an n".


it's interesting how publicly available children's education can also be useful for adults that can't remember obscure grammatical conventions.

"a n" or "an n"? you can't work this out from first principles, you just have to know. the kids videos have the answer!
is it correct to say "an nwa"?

it seems both right and wrong. it's obviously wrong to say "an nigger with attitude". but, what about "an en double-u ay". the n would be necessary there.

it seems obvious that you want to write "a nwa". but you want to say "an nwa" to compensate for the vowel in your pronunciation of "n".

meh. i like it the way it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL3knvasuwQ