60 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(02/07/08 5:00am)
The Mars Volta has always been a no-holds-barred band and has never taken the "less is more" approach. Only the band itself determines where its music goes, and it has made this clear through the music it writes. Its new album The Bedlam in Goliath is no exception to this ideological approach to music.\nLike its previous albums, The Mars Volta has made a concept album, inspired this time by a Ouija board the band's guitarist Omar Rodriguez-Lopez bought in Jerusalem. \nThrough this board came many of the album's track titles, such as "Goliath," "Soothsayer" and "Tourniquet Man" -- all entities it found residing in the board. Shortly after the Goliath spirit cursed them, equipment disappeared while on tour, lead singer Cedric Bixler-Zavala broke his foot, drummers were replaced, Rodriguez-Lopez's studio flooded and the album's engineer lost his mind and dropped off the project.\nDespite the many setbacks, it has produced its most ambitious work to date.\nThe album needs no introduction, and The Mars Volta comes through the gates with all guns blazing on "Aberinkula." The new drummer Thomas Pridgen has plenty of room to show off his amazing chops on this track, and he gives an impressive display of his talent. \n"Ilyena" pays homage to the Volta's funk and Latin-music influences. The syncopated guitar rhythms, percussion and drums all line up perfectly in the breakdown of the song in a way George Clinton might even appreciate.\n"Tourniquet Man" offers listeners a chance to take a breath while listening to the album. It's soft, melodic and calming. Zavala's vocals are quite pleasing to the ear until effects are added that make them harsh.\n"Cavalettas" draws some of its inspiration from King Crimson's Larks Tongue In Aspic. It's fast-paced, but changes come quick. What might be called the chorus in this song is surreal. Meanwhile, "Soothsayer" takes the listener on a strange trip to the Middle East that only the Volta could provide.\nThis album is The Mars Volta's most ambitious work by far. It sounds fuller, and it's evident The Mars Volta has matured and come into its own. This is easily one of the best albums to be heard in quite some time.
(10/25/07 4:00am)
Accounts vary, but the basic story goes something like this:\nOn a back road off Old Highway 37 north of Bloomington, in the depths of the Morgan-Monroe State Forest, lies Stepp Cemetery. Ancient and abandoned, its origins obscure, Stepp is rumored to have been a place of dark deeds and strange rituals -- a place where the veil separating the living from the dead sometimes lifts. \nIn the midst of Stepp's sprawling weeds and crumbling graves stands a worn tree stump. If you visit this stump under the light of a full moon, you will find the woman in black. Her hair turned white, her misty form rising from the earth, she sits upon the stump waiting, eternally patient. Is she protecting the grave of a loved one? Is she looking for her lost child? Is she seeking revenge? No one presumably sticks around to find out.\nSo, WEEKEND decided to ask her. \nWith an expedition of four reporters and two photographers, we traveled out to Stepp, winding our way through the murky woods until we came to the gate marking the mouth of the cemetery's path. And what did we find there by the side of the road?\nA pair of abandoned flip-flops.\nOK, so we didn't see a damn thing -- and not because we didn't try. We wandered through the cemetery, we visited the stump (and sat on it!), we laid down and played dead to see if the supposed inhabitants would accept us as their own. We did everything short of insulting the ghosts' mothers. All we found were some late 19th-early 20th century gravestones with amusingly old-fashioned names (Orestes? Seriously?) and an "abandoned" cemetery that was still reasonably well-tended and maintained. Oh, and on the way out, we ran into some other young people who were on their way in (much to the shock of at least one member of our party, who emitted a wonderfully loud "Waugggh!" and leapt three feet into the air upon encountering them).\nThus, thwarted in our effort to commune with the other side, we fell back on a time-honored journalistic practice: We consulted the experts. \n"Do ghosts exist?" we asked. \nRead what they had to say and decide for yourself.
(07/12/07 4:00am)
Filmed in the Empress Ballroom in BlackPool England during the Elephant tour, this DVD showcases the White Stripes at their rawest and most glorious. The film is shot in 8 mm to give it a grainy look, adding to the back-to-basics feel of it all, and Jack showcases why he is considered a modern guitar god.\nThere are no extras, but with 26 songs there's a ton of concert footage to keep you busy.\nThey run through several blues covers as well as plenty of their early work. Highlights include "Ball and a Biscuit" and the Son House cover "Death Letter"
(04/25/07 4:00am)
A month ago, I wrote about how a decision by the Library of Congress’ Copyright Royalty Board was threatening to wipe out Internet radio. In the five weeks since, things have only gotten worse. After losing an April 17 appeal to the board, starting May 15, Web broadcasters will immediately have to pay 0.08 cents in royalties for every song they played in 2006, then 0.11 cents for every song in 2007, followed by annual hikes up to 0.19 cents per song by 2010 – this will raise their operating costs by thousands and thousands of dollars, immediately bankrupting many stations. Furthermore, broadcasters will have to pay an extra $500 for every channel they have, and even non-profit stations such as National Public Radio will face higher costs. \nI suspect many readers do not understand the stakes in this situation – you might think this doesn’t affect you. So, here’s what I want you to do: \nGo turn on a regular FM radio. Dial the tuner around and see if you can find anything you like. How’d you fare? Excepting WIUX and the various NPR stations – I certainly hope you like country, top 40 or oldies, because that’s what you’re getting (oh, and lots of ads). \nNow, get online – go to RadioTower.com. Check out the 1,400 free stations. Still not enough selection? Go to Live365.com. I’m not quite sure how many free stations they host, but a search for “indie rock” yields 234 alone, and the site claims that a monthly fee gets you access to more than 10,000. Also, note how you can start your own online station. Or try out the free channels on AccuRadio.com; or Pandora.com, which checks bands you like against its database and introduces you to new bands based on your preferences. Or simply open your copy of iTunes, click on “radio” and find something there that strikes your fancy. \nThere’s a point to all this. In an April 15 London Observer column, the writer remarked upon the high quality and variety of American Internet radio compared to that available from Britain, noting, correctly, that it’s because so much of our terrestrial radio sucks. It’s this quality and variety that’s going to be flushed away if the CRB’s decision goes unchallenged. \nSee, at the moment we consumers are losing out to two groups that do not understand how technology is changing American culture, and probably never will: the federal government and major media companies. As the latter group scrambles to squeeze every last ounce of short-term profit out of its product (regardless of its longer-term interests), the former enforces outdated copyright rules and has its belly scratched by lobbyists. If we’re going to put a stop to this, the public has to show the government that our culture belongs to us and not simply to “big media.”\nRight now, the best bet to change things is an appeal to your congressional representatives. Go to http://savenetradio.org to let them know how you feel.
(04/18/07 4:00am)
A friend once complained to me that at this time of year the Indiana Daily Student turns into nothing more than an advertising brochure for Little 500. And with all the coverage we give the race, the parties, the related events and everything leading up to it all, I can see his point. By devoting a lot of attention to Little 5, we’re just trying to give you readers what we think you want. But we also have a duty, after all, to try to inform you about important, serious things that are happening in the world – things you might not care about, but should. \nSo, today I’m declaring this column a “Little 5-free zone.” Instead, we’re going to take an in-depth look at how the rush for campaign money is affecting the 2008 presidential race.\nAt an estimated cost of $1.2 billion, the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics declared the 2004 race for the presidency the most expensive in history (Financial Times, Oct. 21, 2004). According to the Associated Press (Nov. 1, 2004), campaign advertising rose to $600 million (bicycles), which was triple the amount spent on TV and radio (bicycles) in the 2000 race. And next year’s race is expected to be even costlier, with fierce competition between leading Democratic front-runners Illinois Sen. (Beta Theta) Obama and New York Sen. Hillary (Cutters) already resulting in record-breaking fund(racing) numbers. \nThe Chicago Tribune reported Monday that Obama raised $24.8 million, “more money from donors for his (cornhole) than any other candidate during the first three months of the year,” while Clinton raised $19.1 million (PBRs) in the same period. But thanks to $10 million (Buds) left over from her 2006 Senate campaign, Clinton has the larger campaign war (cooler). Other (racers) have raised smaller, but not inconsiderable sums, with Indiana Sen. (Dodds) Edwards reporting a (Coors) $13 million for his primary (cornhole), Massachusetts Gov. (Major Taylor) with $11.9(Millers), Former New (Sparks) Mayor Rudolph (Cinzano) at $10.8 million, New Mexico (Teter) Bill Richardson at $6.2 million and Arizona Sen. John Mc(Army Women) claimed $5.2 (Mad Dog 20/20s) in the bank.\nIn the face of all this money, one must ask: is this having a distorting and (inebriating) effect on our electoral (grilling)? Are we allowing big money (disc jockey) to take over our political (kegs) and control our (booties)? \nBut what’s to be done? The Finance Reform Act of 2002, better known as McCain-Fein (Goldschlager), sought to get rid of the influence of “soft money” – money contributed to political parties from corporations, (alumni), (frats) and (sororities) – but it led to the rise of even less-accountable 527 organizations such as The Swift (Bike) Veterans For (skipping class on Monday) and (Slip ‘n Slide).org.\nInstead, it’s down to us, as individuals, to take an active hand in the workings of our American (debauchery). The decisions these candidates make could have (thirst-quenching) consequences, affecting the future of our (hotties) and our (hotties’ hotties) for (beers) to come.
(04/12/07 4:00am)
While Joseph Gordon-Levitt may still be known to many as that kid from "3rd Rock from the Sun," the 25-year-old actor has skillfully performed a string of interesting, challenging leads ("Manic," "Mysterious Skin" and the over-acclaimed "Brick"). With "The Lookout," Gordon-Levitt continues his recent trend of dark, "edgy" films and excels in what is perhaps his best role yet. He plays Chris Pratt, a young man struggling to gain power and positive momentum in his life after a brain injury destroys his once privileged existence.\nThe story, told by "The Lookout," of Pratt's life post-brain damage is immediately compelling, a little reminiscent of Christopher Nolan's "Memento." From the get-go it is wrenching and stylishly presented. Pratt's impaired memory-sequencing ability, impulse control and motor skills are great obstacles to his daily functioning, let alone his attainment of a satisfying life. "The Lookout" raises the stakes and the suspense when Pratt is bated by the promise of friendship, sex and financial power to help commit a bank robbery. Trying to dissuade him from taking a bad turn is his blind and somewhat eccentric roommate, Lewis, played by Jeff Daniels, whose performance is one of the highlights of the film. \nUnfortunately, Gordon-Levitt and Daniels' roles aside, the characters in this film are weak often to the point of being generic. Matthew Goode ("Match Point") is all right as a sleazy guy looking to take advantage of Pratt's mental instability. But other characters are flat. These include Pratt's powerful and disapproving father, his femme fatale girlfriend Luvlee (Isla Fisher, "Wedding Crashers"), a goofy doughnut-loving cop, several guys who could just as well have been extras borrowed from "The Fast and The Furious" and a criminal mastermind who distinguishes himself by dressing exclusively in outfits that look like they are from the Bad Guys R'Us outlet mall. \nFurther weakening the film is that the whole bank robbery aspect of the movie fails to be well-plotted or entirely believable, and yet it develops into the focal point. Had this part of the film been as strong as that which focuses on Pratt's more mundane struggles, "The Lookout" would surely be a top-notch film. Fortunately, the film is not ruined by its shortcomings. If you are mainly interested in a great crime film, look elsewhere, but if you want to see an engaging drama that spotlights the talents of Gordon-Levitt, go see this movie.
(04/11/07 4:00am)
It’s a crowded world for those of us in the media nowadays. Thanks to cheap, powerful digital technology, the Internet and sites like YouTube and MySpace, any wannabe director or rock star can make their work available for the world to see. And this goes doubly for those of us in print – word processing software is so easy to use, blogs are so cheap to maintain, our work is so easy for people to reproduce. Not that I’m complaining – but it does mean to get noticed, one has to adapt.\nThere are a couple of strategies to finding success in a packed media environment. One is to find a niche. Appeal to a narrow group of devotees and make yourself their go-to source. That’s well and good, but there are so many niches out there already. What if all you can do is cater to the subgroup of a subgroup? The other is the approach more often followed by mass-media outlets such as network TV, Hollywood studios and the “big four” major record labels – appeal to the lowest common denominator. \nThus, as an experiment and a ploy to steal the vast plurality of eyes away from my fellow columnists, today’s column is about four things: beer, basketball, sex and Facebook.\nFor starters, what might Anna Nicole Smith have thought about beer, basketball, sex and Facebook? I know, I know, sad she’s dead, yeah, yeah – but what do you think she might have thought about them? Presumably, she was in favor of sex. But what about the others? Unfortunately, after briefly summarizing her career, the biography on her Web site concludes with “There’s so much more, but bios are boring and I don’t feel like writing any more” before these burning issues are ever addressed. I’m afraid we’ll have to speculate. Having been born in Texas, I’m guessing she was more into football – but that could also mean a positive disposition toward beer. On Facebook I can find nothing, but given her numerous profiles on MySpace, I suspect she might’ve liked it. (Whadda you mean those profiles might not be hers?)\nAnd do you think the folks on “American Idol” like beer, basketball, sex and Facebook? I bet Ryan Seacrest enjoys a beer on occasion, although he might currently be contractually obligated to prefer Coca-Cola. And Paula Abdul was a cheerleader for the Los Angeles Lakers, right? So that’s basketball represented. Sex? I doubt anyone involved with “American Idol” ever has anything to do with sex – just look at how far Clay Aiken got. Facebook? Given all the hits “American Idol” gets in a search of the Indiana network, I bet they’d like it – although the embedded music player, unspeakable garishness and rank commercialism of MySpace might be a better fit.\nAnd what might President Bush think of beer, basketball, sex and Facebook? Oh wait, that’s politics and I’m starting to lose you. Sorry, please come back!
(04/04/07 4:00am)
Spring is here again – and I’m hunkered in my apartment with the blinds drawn, trying to ignore it. But I can still hear it out there – birds twittering, basketballs dribbling, passers-by chatting amiably – like some sort of cloying siren, demanding I be like everyone else and join in the fun. “I’m spring,” it says, “I’m bright and happy – why don’t you love me?” Blech. Spring makes me sick. \nYou’re probably thinking, “How could anyone dislike spring?” Well, here are few reasons:\n• Sunlight. Besides the fact that unprotected exposure, over a long period of time, can kill you – or, at least, make you look like Robert Redford – there are all sorts of reasons a normal college student should see sunlight as the enemy. For one thing, by sneaking past window shades, curtains, etc., it tries to wake you up before noon. You wouldn’t take that from a roommate – why let spring off the hook? Then, it makes the world look bright and wonderful – always while you’re cramming for a test, struggling through a paper, nursing a hangover, recovering from being dumped, sick or otherwise of a contrary opinion. This is its way of mocking you – because spring hates you. (Winter hates you too, but at least by making temperatures unbearably cold, it’s upfront about it). \n• Spring evangelists. “It’s such a nice day – go outside!” “No.” “C’mon.” “No.” “C’mooonnnn!” Does fall or winter ever recruit people to pester you on their behalfs? No. I rest my case. \n• Hotties. Every year, spring comes and skin follows. Which is nice – if you’re attractive. If you’re marginally attractive, you face all sorts of pressure to become more so. For the rest of us, it’s just another not-so-subtle reminder about how we’re going to die alone. \n• Traffic. Spring always makes the local traffic worse – partly because people are inspired to walk and bike. Which I could sympathize with (if not empathize with – see “Sunlight” above) if not for all the folks dashing across busy streets in front of my car; or the bicyclists running stop signs, or weaving back and forth so you can’t pass them, or struggling up hills with narrow roads and no bike lanes. (I’m in favor of bike lanes – but, until they’re installed, I would think a Darwinian concern for self-preservation would make this last behavior far less common than it is.) However, what’s worse is that it inspires the people to drive who really shouldn’t. The people in convertibles who talk on cell phones while their stereos blare and their friends stand in the back hooting and waving their arms, poised to tumble out given a sharp enough turn. Again, nice to know that Darwin’s on the job – I just wish he left me out of it. \nWhat’s that you say, it also means classes are almost over? That’s right – bringing you that much closer to joining the world of temporary jobs and nine-to-five cubicle farms. Yes, oh happy spring.
(03/28/07 4:00am)
My 10-year high-school reunion is coming up this summer, and I’m a bit nervous. Not that I’m doing well in the scheme of things, really. “Grad student” might not be as exciting of a job as “rock star” (or, OK, a lot of things) but it certainly beats “cubicle drone.” \nI’m balder, but also, believe it or not, fitter – and certainly better groomed. I’ve traveled quite a bit, had a fair number of adventures and made a lot of good friends. I’m not married and don’t have any kids – but, on the plus side, I’m not married and don’t have any kids. Best of all, I got out of the town I grew up in (as much as I love it) and I’m not living with my parents (as much as I love them). Still, I can’t shake a concern about whether I’ll measure up once I enter that high-school gymnasium to the sound of 90s pop hits. (I have no idea if this how it’ll actually go down – I’m just deferring to “Grosse Pointe Blank.”)\nBut I’m clearly not alone in this – the phenomenon has been dubbed “the quarter-life crisis,” and all you undergrads should know: It’s out to get you, too. The Boston Globe explained it thus: “there’s a phase of life – quarter-life – which, like adolescence and midlife, has its own set of challenges and characteristics. People get married later and have more transient careers than before. They are in debt longer, sometimes in school longer. The early to late 20s represents a time of extreme instability…” (Sept. 8, 2004). \nFor example, an American Sociological Association survey has found that far fewer 20-somethings have achieved the life “milestones” (such as financial independence, marriage, kids) than the baby boomers had by this point (ABC News, April 21, 2005). The result, said Damian Barr, a writer who’s researched the crisis, is that “the excitement of graduation fades. Real life sets in. And it’s expensive, ugly and competitive. We feel stressed, inadequate and somehow not quite as good as our peers. We feel poorer, less successful and less together” (The London Times, May 1, 2004).\nSo, what to do? In an MSN Encarta interview, authors Alexandra Robbins and Abby Wilner advise that 20-somethings forget worrying about the outward trappings of success or whether their lives are progressing according to some predetermined plan. That’s well and good – but might be better advice for you than it is for me (getting my bachelor’s from a small liberal-arts school, I was never able to count on working in my chosen field or becoming rich). \nYou should take the opportunity to make the most with what you’ve got – to do things that’ll give you plenty of stories to tell your old classmates when you see them and to only worry about making sure you’re happier, on balance, than not. That’s all.\nAlthough walking in with a hot girlfriend would be nice.
(03/21/07 4:00am)
This past weekend, in the course of co-writing an article, my partner and I were given the opportunity to interview members from two fantastic, critically-acclaimed, up-and-coming rock bands. (Which bands? Read tomorrow’s IDS Weekend to find out.) In undertaking this endeavor, I had faith that they would want to talk to us despite our being “lowly” student reporters (albeit for an award-winning paper) – and was proven right. Why? Because it has become so absurdly hard to introduce people to new music, that even great bands need all the publicity they can get. \nYou’ve probably heard some of the major reasons for this already: terrestrial radio conglomerates like Clear Channel with narrow, nationally-homogeneous playlists; Viacom’s near-monopoly on music video channels (they own MTV, MTV2, VH1, BET and CMT) and its seeming predilection for filling them with nonmusical programming; the major record labels’ tendency to concentrate marketing money behind established artists and formulas in the hope of a big payday, rather than hedge their bets on many newer sounds, etc. \nAnd some of the hopes for music’s future aren’t quite panning out either. The satellite radio broadcasters XM and Sirius are trying to merge; and MySpace, while providing an outlet for many, many bands, is simply a miserable, headache-inducing mess. \nThus, I find it amazing that the music industry is preparing to wipe out one of the most promising publicity outlets available (with the help of the federal government, no less). A March 2 ruling by the Library of Congress’ Copyright Royalty Board has mandated the more than doubling of royalties that Internet radio stations must pay to broadcast music (from 0.08 cents each time a listener hears a song to 0.19 cents by 2010) and will require broadcasters to pay a minimum $500 for each channel they offer. This 0.11 cent increase may not sound like much, but it adds up quickly given all the listeners, and significant Web broadcasters such as Kurt Hanson of AccuRadio and Tim Westergren of Pandora.com, have estimated that it will wipe out their businesses. This is on top of the fact that Internet radio already pays higher royalties than terrestrial radio, thanks to a profoundly misguided twist in the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act which makes Internet broadcasters pay royalties not just to composers (as terrestrial radio does) but also to performers (as terrestrial radio does not – based on the fact that they are compensated by the free advertising radio provides). \nThis decision is so revolting that it has actually managed to get Clear Channel and National Public Radio to make common cause against it. In the latter case, as a noncommercial station, NPR would still be hit with a $500 per channel fee – as, I believe, would our own WIUX (I asked station manager Zach Pollakoff about this and, while he expressed doubt that it would affect WIUX too much, he said he thought it would make things more expensive).\nSo, if you love music, petition and bug your congresspersons. Here’s one place to start: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/saveinternetradio/index.html.
(03/07/07 5:00am)
Last Friday, the Indiana Daily Student looked at student reactions to the selection of Michael McRobbie as the next IU president. In what’s becoming this semester’s theme, the article found that students were apathetic toward the announcement and ignorant of not merely its possible significance, but even its occurrence. \nI know you’re busy with midterms and spring break plans – but the shift to a new president could have a major impact on your lives here at IU, and if you don’t get involved or don’t stay informed, you might lose out. So, here are some reasons why we students need to not only pay attention to the current developments, but make sure that our voices are heard:\n• Student engagement. I was at Thursday’s trustee meeting and press conference where McRobbie was announced as the new president. The proceedings began with each trustee, in turn, expressing support for McRobbie and briefly discussing why he’ll do a good job – during this, only student trustee Casey Cox and McRobbie spoke about the importance of teaching (research, on the other hand, received much more emphasis). No one mentioned affordability, except in terms of diversity scholarships. When asked how he’d keep in touch with IU students, McRobbie said through his knowledge of University networks and contacts (rather than, say, directly). \nNow, I don’t think McRobbie means to snub students in any way – for example, his plan to convene student task forces to update the “living and learning environment” at IU and IU-Purdue University at Indianapolis sounds pretty neat – but it’s worth remembering that, having been an IU administrator for a decade, it has been awhile since he has worked with students extensively. If students don’t speak up before the inevitable conflicts come between, say, teaching and research, or affordability and excellence, they could find their interests losing out to those of other groups in the IU community.\n• Graduate education. When I asked McRobbie about the status of graduate student health and dental care, he said that he is planning to conduct a comprehensive review of the state of graduate student support, as he’s concerned that insufficient support could hurt IU’s competitiveness. This didn’t surprise me, both because of his emphasis on research and due to his expressed goal of recruiting new faculty to replace the retiring baby boomers (things to which graduate students will be instrumental). Still, it’s good to know that if graduate students keep pushing on this issue, we might achieve some change.\n• Diversity. In a speech to the Bloomington Rotary Club, McRobbie announced a plan “to double IU’s minority student enrollment by 2013.” At the press conference, he stated that he’s completing a proposal that would provide the funding for the first year of this effort. Still, details at the press conference were rather vague – again, showing a need for student awareness.\nIn short, we’re at a crossroads in IU’s future. If the University is to go the direction you want, you must show the way.
(02/28/07 5:00am)
I've studied a fair amount of political movements, negotiations, protests, revolutions, terrorism and other sorts of means to try to get what you want out of the powers-that-be. But I have to say that a phenomenon recently highlighted by the Chronicle of Higher Education has me baffled: Why would a junior professor ever think a hunger strike could get him or her tenure?\nThe question recently arose from a failed attempt by Massachusetts Institute of Technology associate professor of biological engineering James L. Sherley. For 12 days (Feb. 5 through Feb. 16), Sherley subsisted on water and vitamins, proclaiming he would “die defiantly” if he didn’t get tenure – a status denied to him, he said, because he’s black and MIT is systemically racist. \nNow, it’s certainly true that, across academia, the faculty isn’t diverse enough – the latest Department of Education survey (conducted in fall 2003) showed that 87 percent of full professors are white, while American Indian, black and Hispanic individuals made up only 0.3 percent, 3.2 percent and 2.1 percent of members, respectively (compared with being respectively 1 percent, 12.9 percent and 14 percent of the U.S. population). And it’s a good thing that MIT is investigating Sherley’s claims. But it’s hard to believe that in the 21st century, a top international research university would turn away a tenure candidate based on race. Leaving aside that it would fly in the face of higher education’s values, and the potential legal repercussions, there’s simply the fact that the guy’s a biological engineer. Given the private-sector competition for those studying life sciences, a university would have to be nuts to throw away a qualified candidate. Sherley’s bold demonstration had only one true cause in mind: Sherley.\nMore entertaining is the case of Ralph E. Luker, another former hunger-striker-for-tenure interviewed by the Chronicle of Higher Education on Feb. 22. In 1994, despite having “five books in print, four earned academic degrees (and) a nomination for a Pulitzer Prize,” Luker was denied tenure by Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio. Now, I’ve personally been to Antioch – it’s essentially the stationary version of a Grateful Dead, Phish and Massive Panic tour. My freshman-year roommate, a great guy but also the biggest stoner I’ve ever known, turned down Antioch because “all they ever do is smoke up.” Yet, even at Antioch, Luker’s strike failed.\nThere’s a very simple reason for this: Hunger strikes are based on the idea that an individual is willing to die (painfully) for a cause larger than his or herself. This was why it worked for Mohandas Gandhi, Alice Paul, Cesar Chavez, Nelson Mandela and members of the civil rights movement. This was why the 1981 hunger strike by imprisoned Provisional Irish Republican Army members had a tremendous impact on public opinion – 10 of them died. Thus, if you’re doing it for personal gain, the logic doesn’t really work.\nSo, relax – have a Hot Pocket and update that resume.
(02/21/07 5:00am)
Ever since bubble gum pop took over the mass media in the late ’90s (having since declined – thank God), I’ve had a theory about the genre’s secret origins. It’s an absurd, mad theory with absolutely no evidence – but I like it. It goes something like this:\nBritney Spears, Justin Timberlake, Jessica Simpson, Christina Aguilera, the rest of NSync, the Backstreet Boys, Lindsay Lohan, perhaps Mandy Moore and Hilary Duff are all products of a secret cloning project run by the Walt Disney Company. \nBuried a mile beneath Orlando, Fla., in a discarded Cold War bunker complex is a laboratory where rows upon rows of protoplasm-filled tanks are linked to a computer-controlled life-support system. There, “imagineers” in white lab coats splice together genetic material gathered from the cast of the original 1955-1959 run of the “Mickey Mouse Club” – and possibly its later incarnations and other teen idol projects as well (I’m looking at you Hayley Mills). \nAfter the desired combination of genes is selected, it’s injected into a blank egg, then treated with rapid-development hormones – and, once the brain is sufficiently mature, it’s subjected to constant subliminal programming to make it docile and receptive to choreography. Once the clone has grown to the equivalent of a 15- to 18-year-old human, it’s fished out of the tank, cleaned up, sent to wardrobe, taken to the studio to lay down some vocals for the producers, directed to gyrate its sweaty abs in a music video – then unleashed into the wide world of “TRL,” “Now That’s What I Call Music!” CDs, Pepsi commercials and ABC Family programming. Voila: instant pop star!\nOK, this might be a bit of an exaggeration. But Britney’s decidedly Frankenstein-monsteresque, dome-denuding meltdown this past weekend got me wondering whether, as a culture, have we finally turned a corner – whether we’ve reached the point where the species of tightly-controlled, perfectly-polished, wholly-manufactured celebrity is doomed to extinction. \nThere are three patterns that make me suspect this. First, technology has made the public eye virtually inescapable (anyone with a camera phone can be a paparazzo). Second, if there’s one theme to YouTube and reality TV, it’s making celebrities out of people for being themselves (sort of) instead of building them a perfect, focus group-tested image and making them abide by it (although some reality TV still tries). And third, it’s worth noting that those celebrities pressed into being perfect plastic-image creatures keep unraveling in spectacular fashion – it’s not just that they’re undergoing their regular divorces and drug addictions, it’s that they’re exploding, spiraling off in all sorts of strange and disturbing directions. Mel Gibson, Tom Cruise, Michael Jackson and now Britney – all seem kind of scary to be around. \nNow, I don’t expect the world of public relations flacks and marketers to disappear, but, maybe, just maybe, all these things are adding up to a world where it’s simply too hard to be fake. At least, until Disney perfects its clone recipe.
(02/15/07 12:01am)
Romantic Love, a cultural icon best known for inspiring millions of greeting cards, was found dead on Wednesday. He was more than 900 years old.\nThe cause of death was still undetermined by press time, but police said that the body's state indicated that he had been dead for some time. "There was little more left than a dried-out husk," said Detective Vincent Lupercalia, "And there were signs of predation, gnaw marks. We've brought in Celine Dion for questioning." Friends and relatives were likewise uncertain about the cause of death, but indicated that Love had been ill for some time. \n"Look at all his latest projects," cousin Platonic Love said, 'The Bachelorette,' 'Beauty and the Geek,' that last season of 'Flavor of Love'… I'm not sure if it was dementia, but he clearly wasn't well." The body was found by landlady Venus Grabyewski, who said she had entered Love's apartment after attempting to contact him for weeks. "He hadn't paid the rent in three months, I was trying to evict him," she said, "He was totally bankrupt."\nAlthough Love's precise birth date remains uncertain, popular belief holds that he was born Courtly Love in southern France in the late 11th century, the son of troubadours (known today as "dirty hippies"). Partnered with Chretien de Troyes, he scored an early hit with the late 12th century poem "Lancelot: Knight of the Cart." \nTroyes, a clergyman, used his extensive knowledge of human sexuality to give the poem its stark realism; while Love, always the idea-person, brought the radical notion that male-female relations could involve more than the transfer of property rights (an assertion still disputed today). More hits with other collaborators followed and, as feudalism declined, Love sought to broaden his appeal to commoners as well as nobles. Replacing Courtly with the more rugged "Romantic" (and dropping the stage-name "Cougar" that he'd adopted in the 13th century), Love soon embarked on his career's most productive partnership: that with playwright William Shakespeare. Having initially written only about murder, flatulence, political satire and other base subjects, Shakespeare enthusiastically embraced Love's input. And despite occasional strains (after a row over "Twelfth Night," Shakespeare once said "Sweet Love, I see, changing his property, turns to the sourest and most deadly hate"), they amassed a significant body of work -- including the successful play "Romeo and Juliet," later made into a 1996 film starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes.\nAfter their partnership concluded, Love worked with many and various artists throughout the following three centuries, including Percy Bysshe Shelley, Lord Byron, Robert Burns, Emily Dickinson, William Butler Yeats and D.H. Lawrence. After a relatively lean period in the early 20th century, Love achieved newfound popularity for his association with The Beatles, culminating in the famed 1967 "Summer of Love." This period ended, unfortunately, with Love's misguided introduction of Yoko Ono to John Lennon, and, while busy afterward, his influence never achieved the same peak.\nHe is survived by his three children: Drunken Hookup, Marry For Money and Biological Clock Ticking.
(02/06/07 11:57pm)
As you've probably heard already, Time magazine's pick for its 2006 "Person of the Year" was "You" (as in "all of us"). Inspired by the rise of YouTube, Wikipedia and MySpace, Time celebrated the Internet's empowerment of the average person: the fact that we -- acting as our own movie studio, our own record label, our own newspaper, our own publicist -- have provided the content that has made the Web the most powerful tool of our time.\nPretty exciting, but you don't get to be Time's "Person of the Year" without paying a cost. And what has me curious is not merely the nature of this cost, but our seemingly unabashed willingness to pay it.\nA couple of recent celebrity scandals seem to be illustrative of this larger trend:\nCalifornia Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger found himself in hot water after private audio recordings featuring frank criticisms of other state political figures -- Republican and Democratic -- fell into the hands of the Los Angeles Times. Incredibly, these recordings had been posted on a public section of Schwarzenegger's own official Web site, where they were downloaded by opponents and given to the press.\nMeanwhile, Paris Hilton found herself in a brouhaha more potentially damaging than her sex tapes or "commando" paparazzi shots after a YouTube video featured her apparently using racist and homophobic slurs at a party. The video came from the Web site ParisExposed.com, whose operators claimed to have bought the tape when it and other belongings that Hilton kept in a Los Angeles storage facility were auctioned off after the multi-millionaire failed to pay her storage fee. Hilton is currently suing to shut down the site.\nThese high-profile examples highlight the downside of our informal tendency toward "lifelogging" that has emerged with the wonders of the digital age. In a fascinating article from this week's Chronicle of Higher Education, Scott Carlson examines the growing research into and implications of lifelogging -- "documenting all (one's) conversations, movements, ideas, and correspondence through audio recorders, digital cameras, GPS trackers, pedometers, brain scanners, and other gadgets".\nThe benefits are obvious. Imagine never forgetting an important moment, being able to leave behind a perfect memoir, gaining such insight into human behavior and history. At the same time, imagine having a record of every painful moment, every slight, every sin, every confidence -- and imagine having it become available, deliberately or accidentally, to the whole wide world.\nHardly anyone engages in lifelogging to the extent of the researchers interviewed by Carlson, but most people reading this column (and yours truly) have taken advantage of digital technology to not only record far more information about ourselves, but to make it available to strangers without giving it a second thought.\nSo, why is it that posting information on Facebook doesn't bother us, but talking to a stranger on the bus feels weird? I have no answer. But, then again, having publicized my beliefs in about 140 opinion columns, I'm probably not the best person to ask, either.
(01/31/07 4:08am)
This Sunday I'm going to my first Super Bowl Party since I was an undergraduate. As an Ohioan, I don't have any particular affiliation with either team. (My corner of the state is now Steelers' territory, thanks to the success of local hero Ben Roethlisberger.) And while I like football, I don't follow it closely -- I don't even know the (I'm sure) dramatic back stories behind these two teams. Also, I much prefer college ball to the NFL. The half-time show is almost guaranteed to be awful, not to mention nipple-free. Yet here I am, excited about it nonetheless.\nTo state the painfully obvious, I'm clearly not the only one. Last year average viewership was 90.7 million people, with an estimated 141.4 million people seeing at least a portion. From the way that all networks except CBS (this year's host) are lining up thoroughly expendable programming against the game, you get the impression that not even they plan on watching their channels. \nThe National Retail Federation said "this year, 21.5 million consumers plan to throw a Super Bowl party while an additional 54.6 million people plan to attend one." The American Institute of Food Distribution has claimed that it's America's No. 2 day for food consumption, while the NFL says "there are more pizzas sold on Super Bowl Sunday than any other day of the year." Consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas has estimated that the week before the Super Bowl costs employers $800 million in lost productivity as employees are distracted by pre-game chatter and party preparations.\nYou get the picture. An absolutely ridiculous number of folks are looking forward to gathering around the tube with their friends, and eat many of the same foods, at the same time. But just think of how unusual that is anymore. Following the communications revolution brought on by satellites, cable and the Internet, the prevailing trend in all media has been toward individual preferences, specialization and narrower audiences. Mainstream mass communication -- the film industry, the basic TV networks, the major record labels -- that depends on trying to appeal to as many people as possible, are all struggling to compete.\nYet, Super Bowl Sunday bucks all this. Why? Beyond the game, I suspect it might be the model for the 21st century mass holiday. You don't have to belong to a particular religious, ethnic or language group (not even the localities of the two teams). You don't have to restrict it to family. You don't have to travel far, or dress up, or buy gifts, or cook. You don't even have to move off the couch. It asks little more than that you hang out with friends, watch TV and eat.\nSure, it lacks other holidays' deeper meanings -- but, in this day and age, there's something to be said for simply pulling people together for a common experience once in awhile, no strings attached. \nAnd, uh … Go Colts! Or whatever.
(01/24/07 12:39am)
As the Chicago Bears advance to the Super Bowl and the infamous "Super Bowl Shuffle" video makes the rounds via YouTube, it has made me wonder -- have we finally managed to turn the clock all the way back to the 1980s?\nLet's look at some of recent international events, shall we? There was the well-publicized story of the Russian spy killed by radiation poisoning in London -- which might not have been so reminiscent of the Cold War if it hadn't come after years of building authoritarian and anti-American behavior in Moscow (keep in mind that we still don't know if the Russian government actually did him in). More recently, Russia has expressed anger at U.S. plans to establish missile bases in Eastern Europe -- echoing the controversy over the United States' mid-80s deployment of Pershing II missiles in Western Europe. The modern case is different, of course, in that the new missiles are being deployed to counter an Iranian attack -- but that brings us to another corollary: Iran is back in the news again calling us "The Great Satan" seemingly every other day.Given that China reignited a classic "Star Wars" concern by blowing a satellite out of orbit Jan. 11; the rise of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia is generating talk of socialist populist movements spreading through Latin America; and that Western Europe might be back to being international terrorism's top destination once again (this time of a jihadist, rather than communist or nationalist, variety) -- it's hard to shake the feeling that we've heard this tune before. \nOr take the U.S. economy. Since 2001, the economy has been growing rather steadily, but just as from 1982 to 1990, this growth has been dogged by pessimism -- and over the same concerns: the gap between rich and poor, and international competition. The only changes being, on the first count, that we don't have a new term for "yuppies," and on the second, that fear of Japan has been replaced by fear of China and India. Of course, with a Republican president and a Democratic Congress, divided government could well deepen the similarity.\nAnd, finally, lets look at pop culture. Having been a kid in the '80s, it's striking for me that all the old toys are back -- G.I. Joe, Star Wars action figures, Transformers. Then you also have slasher movies making a dramatic return (not to mention Hollywood's countless remakes). And while hip-hop dominates instead of hair metal, much of the mainstream commercial stuff is just as mindless and decadent (fortunately, the return of synth-powered new wave appears to have died out in 2005). And don't think I haven't seen some of you ladies trying to resurrect the leggings, baggy off-the-shoulder shirt and hoop-earrings combo.\nWhat to make of these developments? Is this the work of some shadowy, widespread yuppie conspiracy? Is some higher power nostalgic? All I can say is this: Invest in shoulder pads.
(01/17/07 4:17am)
When I'm with my parents somewhere that has an oldies station playing on the radio, my dad will name the songs, who sang them, the month and year they came out and whether they played in southern Ohio, where my folks grew up.\nI do the same thing -- except, as an indie-rock fan, my music doesn't get much airplay. Instead, I have to do it with the background music to commercials. "That's The Postal Service!" (in a UPS ad). "That's M.I.A.!" (in a Honda ad). "That's Goldfrapp!" (in a Verizon ad, in a Motorola/Alltel ad, in a Target ad).\nI have decidedly mixed feelings about this. Don't get me wrong, I'm not yelling "sell out!" -- at least, not in most cases. (Of Montreal's rewrite of "Wraith Pinned to the Mist [And Other Games]" into an Outback Steakhouse jingle really pushes the line.) I've never been one to think that being able to make money off your art made an artist any less legitimate. I'm happy to see that bands are successful, that they're able make their music and still eat and put roofs over their heads.\nAnd, after all, what can you do when most of radio is limited to tiny, nationally homogeneous playlists dominated by the major record labels (and their marketing -- sometimes, payola -- budgets)? What do you do when, out of any given day, about 18 hours of MTV's programming, and all of its prime-time, is dedicated to reality shows? What can you do when practically the only place you can get MTV-style exposure as an indie band is MTV2's "Subterranean," a program that regularly airs from 1 to 2 a.m. on Mondays?\nHow does a band get the word out? The Web does help, but sorting through the sheer volume of competing bands asks a lot from potential listeners (not to mention that the best known source for such music -- MySpace -- is so irritating it can make them want to gouge their eyes out).\nIn Michael Azerrad's history of '80s underground rock, "Our Band Could Be Your Life," he shows that indie pioneers such as Black Flag and the Minutemen had to endure seriously grueling conditions to produce and publicize their work. If getting a bit of a song in a commercial saves you from having to go through that, more power to ya.\nMy real worry is this: What does it say about our culture when commercials have better music than our major mass-media sources? When it's nearly the only way for great new, original rock and pop to reach your normal, non-Web dwelling person? When advertising executives clearly have keener ears than top-flight record executives?\nThis can't be healthy. In the oppressively politically correct future of the sci-fi movie "Demolition Man," what's the hottest music around? That's right -- 20th-century advertising jingles! So, if you see Wesley Snipes running around with his hair dyed blond, know this: I told you so.
(01/07/07 11:26pm)
Oh, so is the government's executive branch trying to claim it has the right to open our mail without warrants or immediate safety concerns?\nIn a signing statement attached to a Dec. 20 postal-reform bill, the White House said it would interpret a section of the bill -- and it's a doozy -- "which provides for opening of an item of a class of mail otherwise sealed against inspection, in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances, such as to protect human life and safety against hazardous materials, and the need for physical searches specifically authorized by law for foreign intelligence collection."\nNote: Signing statements are declarations of how the executive branch should enforce -- or, more controversially, interpret -- a law.\nIt's that "maximum extent permissible" part that makes me, the American Civil Liberties Union and assorted others nervous. Current law allows authorities to open your mail (a) after getting a warrant; (b) if they have a reasonable suspicion that it is an urgent threat (your package is ticking, glowing, spilling white power); (c) before getting a warrant in limited, emergency situations under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or (d) if it can't be delivered as addressed, so the post office can search it for another destination address or return address.\nTo be fair, both the president and the post office have denied that the statement represents a change in government policy, instead saying they were merely making clear that the bill would maintain previous executive powers. The Associated Press has quoted Tom Day, senior vice president of government relations for the Postal Service, as saying: "As has been the long-standing practice, first-class mail is protected from unreasonable search and seizure when in postal custody. Nothing in the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act changes this protection. The president is not exerting any new authority."\nAnd it's not like the noise about this is coming from otherwise neutral sources. In the Washington Post's Jan. 5 coverage of Capitol Hill reaction, criticism of the signing statement came from Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer. And despite its occasional token defense of some right-wing nut's free-speech rights, the ACLU is about as nonpartisan as the IU College Republicans. \nAll that said, as someone who trends more right than left, this signing statement worries me. As recently as 2005, the government displayed just how far this "maximum extent" can reach, when documents attained by the ACLU through the Freedom of Information Act revealed that the Department of Defense had monitored the e-mails of nonviolent college anti-war protesters after they disrupted business at a recruitment center and vandalized recruiters' vehicles (as mentioned in an Indiana Daily Student staff editorial from Oct. 27, 2006).\nSo, the prez says the signing statement doesn't extend his powers? OK, let's revise the statement to make that clear: If I want wildly off-base interpretations of text, I'll ask a post-modernist English prof, thank you very much.
(12/06/06 5:04am)
In September, the IDS ran an Opinion front reacting to the findings of Cathy Small, a Northern Arizona University anthropology professor who enrolled as a university freshman to gain insight into her undergraduate students' behavior. During the course of my term as the IDS Opinion editor, I've felt a lot of kinship for Small. I'm a double outsider: a graduate student in a mostly undergraduate organization (though more grad students are involved than you'd think) and a nonjournalist who's working for a newspaper.\nThis isn't to say I've felt unwelcome -- my colleagues have turned out to be terrific friends -- but it gives me a somewhat detached perspective and perhaps a bit of cover to say a couple things that others might want to say but can't.\n• On the School of Journalism. Look, I'm not a journalism student -- I've never even taken a journalism class -- so I can only comment on what I've observed. That said, throughout this semester, I've heard students repeatedly express concern about the education and services provided by the School of Journalism. There is frustration that the courses offered are more focused on abstract theories (say, about the media's impact on society) than how to actually perform professional journalism. There is also criticism aimed at the school's difficulty in placing students after graduation. Perhaps these are persistent, unavoidable gripes -- professors necessarily focus on theory and journalism is a hard field to make it in. All I can say is that the dissatisfaction is there, and as all schools and departments are continually looking for areas to improve, these might be some places to start.\n• On undergraduate life. As an alumnus of the College of Wooster, a small liberal-arts school in Ohio, my undergraduate experience was considerably different from that of an IU undergraduate. This semester has been a real window into the life of an IU undergrad -- far more so than my 4 1/2 years of giving lectures. Now, the IDSers aren't typical undergrads. The newsroom regulars have to be highly driven to keep up with the paper's demands. They're more engaged in campus events and they're embedded in a more expansive social network than, I suspect, your average atomized student. But I think there are some things to take away from their experience For one, they crave relevance from their courses. Academics (including yours truly) might value knowledge for its own sake, but if you want to get through to your students, you have to demonstrate that your course is important to their lives. For another, many are struggling to balance complex schedules of classes, jobs and social activities, and it makes me wonder if making them sit through a 50- or 75-minute lecture is the best way to provide an education under these circumstances.\nI could say much more, but my space is short. I've learned a lot this semester, and I thank all those involved in giving me the opportunity.