I went for a drink with two old friends recently, and one of them asked me who I'd rather see the celebrity deathclock start on soonest, Britney Spears or Amy Winehouse? I didn't really have to think about it, I'd much rather have another Amy Winehouse album than a Britney album, so I marked miss Spears for Death. My other friend protested that caring about celebrities personal lives is for women and homosexuals.
I don't agree, it's pure performance art. What we think of as a celebrity's 'private' life is a gestalt entity consisting of their actual private life, the publicists' and agents' spin on their private lives, tabloid journalists idea of what will sell more copies and the public need for entertaining scandals. By the time you read about it, if it bears any resemblance to reality, somebody hasn't been doing their job. If you think that a magazine has any idea what Brad Pitt's private life is like, you're an idiot. It's an industry that involves hundreds of thousands of people building scandals out of the most mundane and unremarkable things.
'The Hollywood insider' (not the magazine) is the character that makes a lot of gossip journalism possible. These are usually failed celebrities themselves, and they can be either bitter or benevolent about it. They're the people who hang out at the parties and then sell their stories to the papers. The jilted lovers, the confidantes eager to write tell-all books, the gal pals who write the gushing blurbs about the dresses at the wedding, or the simplicity of the decor. Or they can be the people 'revealing' drug problems, eating disorders, etc. Usually anonymously, always for the stars' own benefit, of course. Seeing as they are betraying the confidences of their so-called friends, there is really no reason to take anything they say to heart.
Why are the lifestyles of the Rich and the Famous so compelling? It's not just the gossip, there's something archetypical going on here. The whole Brangelina thing has seriously religious overtones, for me at least. Brad is a bit like a sun god avatar, a blonde, smiling, good-natured actor, who marries Angelina Jolie, who always reminded me of Kali, the blood obsession, the tattoos, and she just looks like the pictures. Beautiful but deadly, and a mother. They've slid firmly into the part of my brain that keeps various religious cosmologies apart, probably because they spent a lot of time and money tapping into the same archetypes as those gods. The Greek pantheon is filled with jealousy, rage, adultery, murder, incest and rape. They realised that seeing the divine dragged through the mud is one of the great joys of life. Perfection is as boring as it gets.
I also can't enough of the ridiculous excess. If all the money and the fame doesn't create larger than life personalities, then what does? Having so much money you don't even know what to do with it anymore, can't be good for you, nor can being recognised on the street give you a humble disposition. I was spellbound watching "The Fabulous Life of Celebrity Pets". I can't see why anybody wouldn't want to watch a documentary on how to spend a middle management salary a day on a dog. It's the kind of lunacy that just makes me happy. If you don't like that attitude, feel free to be horrified that there's a dog that's richer, more famous and that has a better life than you, and not because it can talk or cured cancer in a whimsical laboratory accident. That is at least as valid a reason to keep watching.
If I ever become famous, my friends have my permission to sell any stories, real or imagined to the press. Though I prefer imagined, because I don't think there's anything I've done in the last ten years that qualifies as a scandal. I'm thinking something along these lines:
"He sat in the room, covered in coconut oil and wearing only lederhosen, forcing the midgets to dance with his whip, while he halfheartedly tried to strangle the swan. It was then that I realised that Hollywood had changed him."
In fact, let's make it contest. Whoever leaves the best interview snippet in the comments section along with his name and postal address, will get my copy of "The Man Who was Thursday" by G.K. Chesterton. Make your entry 100 words or less. Contest closes the 16th of May. I will not correspond with you about whether or not you've won. The winner will be announced on this blog on the 17th.
Wednesday, 16 April 2008
I worship at the altar of Brangelina
Del.icio.us Add to del.icio.us
Digg DiggIt!
Reddit Reddit
Stumbleupon Stumble This
Google Bookmarks Add to Google Bookmarks
Yahoo My Web Add to Yahoo MyWeb
Technorati Add to Technorati Faves
Slashdot Slashdot it
Posted by
Olivier de Vries
at
22:14
Labels: beauty, celebrities, consumer culture, image, media, reality
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
That line of mine about homo's/woman is very important to me. Please handle it gently.
By the way every time you quote me, Edelbert is going to die a bit more.
So please continue. You can give me a call in case you need me.
About a (fictional) interview with you, give me some time, I will make a good one.
Actually in real life I remember after a night drinking heavily you got the urge to sneak up into your parents bedroom where they were sleaping. Does that qualify for a sick story? I will try to remember something sicker, something that homosexuals and woman like.
I think it was back in the summer of '03. Things hadn't been going too well with me, and he invited me to Bilthoven for a garden party. Aside from the languid hookers vomiting carelessly in the bushes, what struck me most was that in such a drug addled state he saw the need for pants completely unnecessary. Explaining his irritation with belts and buttons, he offered to take mine and give me a full run of the women in the rose bushes. Our friendship ended with my refusal and his prompt attempt to bludgeon me with a leg of lamb.
www.matthijsdinant.com/default.aspx
I need to know if it works on an apple...
He Beer, I'm going to go ahead and use your blog as if it's mine, yeah, that would be great.
Today at work we bulked some 100.000 Canadians: 'lees de vraag oetlul!'. Until now there are no replies other then 'No', 'Yes', 'What', 'What?', etc. We hope it stays that way. (I don't actually)
The mistake wasn't made by me, but it gave me lots of inspiration for future work.
The other thing that happened is that while I was drinking a beer at 5:20, two guys came to the balcony and one of them was clearly being sacked. He happened to be my future boss in the gameprogramming sector of the company. (these guys work and tell nerdy jokes upstairs, I want to do that too!)
I dont know what will happen with my future position, and whether I'll ever have 2 monitors on my desk.
Now its time to go home and annoy Edelweiss
Are you there? We have to go to the gym.
What time and where exactly is the shooting taking place?
Voor Olivier: in het nederlands, sorry, ik kan geen engels
Roy orbison: In dreams 1963
Supertramp: Dreamer 1974
Weezer: Only in dreams 1994
In dreams, het beste nummer van Roy Orbison, heeft net als veel van zijn andere nummers een ongelijkmatige maat. Roy Orbison was een meester daarin. In tegenstelling tot het standaard poplied schema dat in de jaren 50 is onstaan in de VS, en doorontwikkeld door The Beatles in de jaren 60, is het schema van Roy Orbison niet 4/4 maat met 3 of 4 akoorden, maar hij wisselt gewoon van maat als het hem uitkomt. Bijvoorbeeld in 'It's over' is er geen pijl op te trekken hoe je het maatritme moet interpreteren. Hij doet het zo subtiel dat de gewone luisteraar het niet eens merkt. soms 7/8, dan weer 4/4, dan 5/4. De violen op de achtergrond leiden je door het lied heen, terwijl de drummer gewoon de eerste tel van de maat slaat, en de volgende tellen gewoon zachtjes door drumt. Ik denk dat de drummer het ook niet helemaal wist, en maar gewoon de violen volgde.
In 'In dreams' is er minder variatie in de maat, (alleen aan het einde), maar de opbouw is qua melodie hetzelfde. Steeds een stapje hoger. De text van het nummer doet erg denken aan de text van 'Only in dreams' van Weezer uit 1994.
'In dreams': "...it only happens in dreams"
'Only in dreams': "but when you awake, its all been erased"," That way there's no way I will crush your pretty toenails into a thousand pieces." etc
Het eind van 'Only in dreams' is een van de beste instrumentale climaxes ooit gemaakt. Je denkt het lied is afgelopen omdat steeds minder instrumenten spelen, en net als bij de start is de bass gitaar de enige, de drummer drumt nog maar 1x per maat. Maar dan komt een gitaar erbij en gaat de bass 2x per tel dezelfde noot slaan. De drummer doet mee en de gitaar ook. De melodie wordt steeds hoger en een 2e gitaar komt erbij die een soortgelijke melodie speelt die precies goed als een soort 2e stem meedoet. Het volume wordt hoger en de gituaren gaan hoger spelen, iedereen weet nu waar dit toe moet lijden, een climax waarbij alle instrumenten vol meespelen, de gitaren doen een loopje om de climax te benadrukken en de tragedie van het nummer. De gitaren verswijnen en het enige dat over is, is de bass, NET ALS HET BEGIN! De bass doet overigens het hele nummer dezelfde melodie. Alleen de allerlaatste noot is een G omdat het nummer in G staat.
'In dreams staat overigens in C' iets dat maar heel weinig gebeurt in popliedjes. Meestal is het E omdat dat de laagste noot op een gitaar is, (meestal), en gitaristen geen noten kunnen lezen.
'My name is Jonas' op hetzelfde album als 'Only in dreams' staat trouwens ook in C.
'Dreamer' van Supertramp, 1974, staat in D. Meestal zijn nummers die in D staan wat vrolijker en meer gericht op de A, de kwart in een D akkoord. De combinatie D-A is al sinds de klassieke tijd bekend als een zeer sterke, in het gehoor liggende combinatie; je WILT dat er een A gespeeld wordt na de D, en omgekeerd.
De favoriete toonsoort van Chopin trouwens was As-groot, maar dat terzijde.
Het meest opzienbarende gedeelte in 'Dreamer' is natuurlijk het midden, waarbij er iets anders gespeeld wordt dan de hele rest van het lied. De drummer gaat koel drummen, en dat helpt eigenlijk al alles om het hele nummer koel te maken. (iets wat ze live trouwens veel vaker deden dan in de studio, ik raad aan om 'School' te luisteren van een van hun life albums, zeer gaaf! Het lijkt bijna een ECHTE koele band.
live albums bedoel ik
lijden of leiden?
verder top!
hop hop hop
rechtop of
op zijn kop
vroeger
of later
bestaat bier nog steeds uit
gerst mout of hop
en water
Leids ontzet
Trouwens op zijn kop is ook rechtop, er is dus geen tegenstelling.
Of is op zijn kop soms kromop?
Rijmen is voor mietjes. Met hele kleine tietjes. Dat staat als een huis. Recht door zee.
Nieuwe tips voor ouwe muziek:
Metallica: Orion, Master of puppets
I found out that Metallica is a 'thrash metal band' according to Wikipedia.
'Thrash metal songs typically use fast, percussive and low-register guitar riffs, overlaid with shredding-style lead work.'
Or in Dutch:
'Gesel metaalliederen gebruiken typisch snel, slaande en laag-register guitar riffs, bedekt met een verscheurende style lood werk.'
Its difficult to accurately describe a music-genre in English, but it's just impossible in Dutch. I think this describing of music in terms like 'shredding-style lead work' began somewhere in the mid-late '70's, when a lot of new music was being made, whose makers wanted to be non-mainstream. (punk for example)
In the eighties punk was more and more being raped itself, (kiss), and became mainstream. In the early 90's a new non-mainstream band appeared, Nirvana, that absolutely hated all the make-up bullshit of bands like kiss. When Nirvana became (somewhat) mainstream, singer/lead-guitarist Cobain decided to just kill himself. (where were you when you heard the news? I was playing 'Secret weapons of the Luftwaffe' when my sister told me, and I ask here who Kurt Cobain was)
Anyway about Metallica, you should listen to 'Orion' on 'Master of puppets', and wonder how this was even possible (1984!!!)
I will divide the world into two kinds of people: the ones who can keep up with the almost jazzie kind of rythm change during the end of the first part of the song, and the ones who dont.
You haven't truly lived if you still don't. By the way you have to prove to me that you can. For example by stamping your feet.
After that you can take a break and listen to another brilliant instrumental song, 'ramble tamble, ccr'
I'm sorry, master of puppets was made in 1985, published in 1986.
WHERE IS YOUR NEW POST? YOU ONLY HAVE A COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE THE END OF THE MONTH, I WONT STOP TYPING IN CAPITALS IF YOU DON'T POST SOMETHING, I'M GOING TO INDIANA JONES TONIGHT.
"De een voelt zich gekwetst door het morele imperialisme van de huidige christensocialistische regering, een ander is boos als je het steeds meer in zwang rakende vernauwde heiland-denken ter discussie stelt." (Nico Dijkshoorn, nu.nl, 22 mei 2008)
http://mleddy.blogspot.com/2007/10/reticulating-splines.html
Beautiful blog.
Wow Paris spend alot of money on her dog!
Post a Comment