Flores.

Well, a new bipedal hominid species, homo floresiensis, was found this week in Indonesia. I hope everyone smiled. This little lady (though the papers were calling it a 'flores man') may be a descendant of homo erectus. Like the screenwriters of a Matrix sequel, the Creationists will be trying throwing as much coal as they can into their burnt out engine on their runaway train, (except they can't because the coal is actually just ash) trying to discredit this amazing find, since now the whole 'how come we haven't found any of the missing links?' pseudo-argument is becoming less and less palatable (well, the flores man isn't actually an ancestor, but it does raise questions about all that stuff of which I know very little). Still, morons will be morons. And I mean morons.

Missy Higgins was great, except for some drunk fucks standing behind me, talking loudly and being criminally obnoxious. I think I just used a nominalization. Missy Higgins is a person, not an event. But you know what I meant.

Self-reminder

Since I don't want that ARIA post being the most recent thing anymore, and I still don't quite 'get' this blogging thing, I will put my sporadic posting to good use and remind myself of what I have to do over the next week or so.

November 1. - Evolution of Consciousness essay due.
November 4. - Correctional theory and practice test due.
November 8. - Social order and Social Change essay due.
(November 9. - Halo 2 comes out)
November 25. Sociology of Crime and Deviance exam.

All of this probably requires I know a little bit more about the following: Foucault, Durkheim, Weber, Marx, Bourdieu/subcultural theory, postmodernism/poststructuralism, Symbolic Interactionism, Ethnomethodology, Phenomenology, Donald, Calvin, Edelman, Deacon, Darwin, Dawkins, Dennett, Feely and Simons, Braithwaite, ethnographies relating to globalization and the introduction of money into local cultures.

Not tonight though. I'm seeing Missy Higgins.

Sick of puns about Jet

Predictably, the ARIA Awards belonged to Jet. Since, despite whatever respect I might have for them, ARIA cannot distinguish between 'Best' and 'Highest Selling' to the point of making them separate categories almost a joke, many awards were delivered unfairly. I don't want to bad mouth Jet (at least they stopped the puerile Powderfinger from raping the awards once again), so I won't. Suffice it to say that I don't believe their awards were justified. That, and drummers shouldn't be allowed to speak in public. Unless you're Terry Bozzio. Or Dave Lombardo.

Someone needs to explain to me how John Butler can win 'Best Male Artist' when he is in other categories as a *band*. If we can separate a leader from a band and put them in different categories, why hasn't Daniel Johns won Best Male Artist for the last ten million songs he wrote, making his useless bandmates rich?
Speaking of which, that the Dissociatives didn't win anything (well, that's not true, they won Best Cover Art and Best Video)would baffle me if I weren't used to ARIA having their heads up their arses.

I am, however, very happy that Missy Higgins won best pop performance. She is the new Delta, as far as I'm concerned. She's a terminal illness away from being beloved everywhere. Well, maybe not. But Delta has ruined it. This whole thing with the Scud...well, at least she's writing with Guy Chambers.

I know the best pop song of the year and all I got was this lousy sense of self-satisfaction.

Just a quick thought. It is a pity we live in an age where popular music is no longer popular music. Morrissey's You are the Quarry album is the best pop/rock release of the year and I have heard nothing on the radio, nor seen anything on television regarding it. Apparently, this is nothing new for the most suave, enigmatic and freaking coolest man in popular music.

The only reason I can come up with as to why 'First of the Gang to Die' (the catchiest and coolest pop song of the 00s so far)did not chart is lack of exposure. It's been out for months and he's even released a third single from the album. Not that anyone reads this, but I implore you to hear this song.
Let's just run over what the top 5 singles are on the Australian charts (according to Hit Magazine, 14/10/04). The albums aren't quite the farce the singles are, if only because Missy Higgins, Green Day and Little Birdy are supremely better than some of the refuse found below.
1. She will be loved - Maroon 5. Just awful. Pay attention to the lyrics. Or not. That women love this song is only testament to how feminism has failed to connect in the younger generations.
2. Car Wash - Christina/Missy Elliot. From the Shark Tale soundtrack. Such good role models for kids, aren't they?
3. Leave (Get Out)- JoJo. What with all the brouhaha about child porn in the news recently, if we skim a few more newspaper pages along, we see that a sexualised 13 year old has a hit single. I'm not denying anyone agency, but maybe the media are its own worst enemy.
4. These Kids - Joel Turner and the Modern Day Poets. This is the guy who auditioned for Idol as a beatboxer, didn't get through and now has a higher placing single than the winner, so I should be supportive. But no.
5. Out with my Baby - Guy Sebastian. So, Guy is a celibate Christian but expects people to buy a song with lines like 'I’m gonna make you shake ‘til you shake ‘til six in the morning baby' and 'Anything she wants, I got for (sic)' Not even naive Guy could argue that dancing and sex aren't inextricably linked.

Is there a pattern here? Two songs about sex, one song about 'the kids' (kids love that shit - just don't write a reflexive song about *why* the kids are so fucked up, then it's 'preachy'), one song sung by a kid (about a sexual relationship) and one song about nothing whatsoever (if Car Wash is about anything, it's sex).

I could continue like this for every song and every album on the charts, but you see it's more of the same (actually, 6 and 7 on the singles charts I think are admirable pop nuggets. Natasha Bedingfield's These Words and GreenDay's American Idiot). Pop music is dead. Or it isn't, but it's now a misnomer.

Charts are dubious anyway. Only some stores get counted, chains are weighted more than independents and the numbers they work off are based on shipment, not sales (ever wonder why that Rise Up song was a no. 1?). Little Birdy was no. 1 at JB Hi FI this week, but Cosima was in HMV. Pathetic.

Wake up, Australia.

Meandering

One of the problems with the voting population of this country is that not enough understand the difference between our system and the American one. They think they are voting in Presidents, not parties. Most don't even know we have 3 year terms.
I'm convinced the implications for the Coalition controlling the Senate haven't sunk in yet, if they ever will.
Over the last few days a lot of people have been asking how, if everyone they know didn't vote for the Coalition, could this election result be? First reaction, of course, is 'insular lefties, don't allow for diversity of opinion'. This question, however, has been framed usually not in terms of an angry leftie, but rather a confused, disenfranchised, impotent and ashamed citizen borne out of dashed hopes that, for a fleeting moment, maybe things could change.
Well, we do have an aging population and since they are on their way out would rather secure their own future than worry about the young. Which is fine with me: I'm sure I won't give a rat's when I'm old. But don't old people get sick more than young people? Won't they need Medicare? Wasn't that Labor's whole schtick? Are the elderly population so conservative they can't keep their own interests in mind? We shouldn't deny the aged their agency, and I don't want to speculate. But that's kind of what I've done.

I don't think I'm angry, but I am slightly bemused and, yes, disenfranchised that this nation I thought I knew is somehow so unlike what I thought.

Plenty wrong with Australian Idol

While it seems futile to talk about what is wrong with Australian Idol, I thought a few quick key points should be made about why Australian Idol is even worse than it has to be. This list could be constantly updated

1. Marcia's ebonics - Ok, you're African-American. We get it. That's no excuse to litter every utterance with dated, stereotype-confirming, wigga-inducing palare. If she has ever said anything that wasn't so laden with cliches that it weighed down the actual content of the sentence and drowned any sincerity she may have intended, I've not seen it.

2. Dicko's defiance - It's one thing to admit you're a cocksucking major record label producer, it's another to personify scum and then act as if there is no difference between Kelly Clarkson and Roger Waters (both about as good looking as each other). Dicko is defiant in his role as the 'producer guy'. Every so often he gets on his high horse about how the competition isn't 'glorified karaoke' - as if there is something inherently wrong with karaoke that isn't present in Idol - and that performer x has proved all the critics wrong because they managed that oh-so-hard task of being able to carry a tune. Dicko's pseudo-poltical persona grates also. Whilst I applaud him for his honesty, what he likes is often as bad as what he hates. And, really, when he's at home by himself, he's not listening to Rob Mills. And if he is..,man, what a cocksucker.

3. Holden's idiocy - Mark Holden's claim to fame since being a one-time pop singer is that he writes and produces for Vanessa Amorosi. He holds her up as the bastion of popstardom and something all the Idol contestants should aspire to. That's right, the same Vanessa Amorosi that hasn't released anything in four years and may never be heard from again. Aside from that, Holden is a victim of the fads and his whole 'touchdown' catch-phrase - not to mention the others- is vapid, bloated and unnecessary. That said, he can sometimes be the voice of reason (but when you're stuck between an arrogant Brit and an American in Australian clothing, what recourse to 'reason' is there?).

4. Foreman's arrangements - If John Foreman is a better band leader, pianist, musician etc. than Chong Lim (who made the switch to 7 along with Daryl Somers) I will eat Sydney. Aside from his nasal voice, awful appearance and arrogance, Foreman's arrangements of the Idol songs are pop-by-numbers and always include some kind of shitty key change even if the original didn't have one. Case in point: last night was the Beatlemania episode. Aside from it being among the more horrible things I will witness this year (unless, of course, I stumble across execution footage or child porn), it involved changing Lennon/McCartney songs to no end (luckily, I don't think Idol has the rights to any Harrison songs). Firstly, George Martin and Paul McCartney's arrangements on the original Beatles albums are literally flawless and any attempt to change them is folly. Foreman, apparently acting on behalf of the Idol contestants, rearranged certain songs. Even if the contestants wanted something changed, Foreman was the one who actually did it. And you don't rearrange Beatles songs; especially with crappy key changes.

5. The Banter - Believe it or not, Andrew G and James aren't quite the fuckwits they appear to be on Network Ten. Their banter is written for them by hacks and it is noticeably more awful than the ad-libs they do on [V]. On Channel [V], with the free-reign and freedom of pay-tv, they can be much less watered down and more natural in their banter. Before Idol they didn't actually present together very much. They were only put together because Fremantle Media, I guess, wanted to create Australia's own Ant and Dec (am I the only one who remembers they used to be a shitty, failed pop group called PJ and Duncan?). In any case, Idol has perhaps ruined any entertainment I used to get out of them; let's just hope Yumi Stynes doesn't get pulled into free-to-air watered-down programming. Lucky for me, free-to-air probably isn't ready for a non-white tv presenter (well, Ernie Dingo, maybe).

There's more, but even I am sick of this.

Howard's Mend

Perhaps I need to travel around this country more. I don't seem to quite understand the voting patterns of other states, if I even understand my own. To wit: 'In Victoria, there was a 2.77 per cent swing to the coalition, giving the government 51 per cent of the vote and Labor 49 per cent' (Ninemsn).
My electorate returned Jenny Macklin, as expected, but frighteningly the Family First Party received more votes than the Democrats and the Greens put together (Herald Sun, 9/10/04:105). Still, there were also more informal votes than votes for the Family First Party, so maybe apathy will get the better of fundamentalists trying to break down the church and state barrier.
So, what does all this mean? Not a hill of beans, apparently. Howard/Costello march on forward wearing those shit-eating grins they have patented. Latham was devastated as was Crean (refusing to talk to the Chaser); and the 18-40 year olds that Mick Molloy was so picketing for - and asked Latham about - seem to have been forgotten.
One consolation is that if John Kerry wins the US election, Howard and Costello will have to change policies anyway, in order to maintain the collective Australian tongue firmly in the back pocket of the American trousers, working its gravelly tip through the fabric of pride and decency until we are into a full-on flesh-on-flesh relationship.
Advance Australia fair, indeed.

Ways 'Neighbours' can be improved

While the lesbian storyline may be a step forward, it has come off, so far, as being dealt with no better than any of the 'issues' that get randomly scattered across such shows. Do I dare go so far as to suggest the writers are trivialising homosexuality? Not quite, but they seem to be unnecessarily upholding certain stereotypes at the expense of more important ones.

Let me explain. Despite what the Neighbours writers consider 'topical', if you're going to tackle homosexuality, then go the whole hog. As far as I'm concerned - and much of the viewing public - lesbians, as portrayed on television, are just considered too cuddly to be confronting. Neighbours, trying to bring Ramsey St. into the 21st century (after all, that's when homosexuality started, right?)have decided to go for the safest, least-amazing depiction of homosexuality (and one that may only exist in the imaginations of reality-porn writers): the soft teen lesbian.

I'm sure the writers thought they were breaking stereotypes by having a pretty teenage girl turn out to be a lesbian, but really it's more cliched than the man-hating-dyke. For a start it feeds the heterosexual, meat-eating, red blooded male-ego that reveres anything that loves women as much as they do (as long as she's not ugly). The characterization is also wonky. The way Lana is portrayed and written also plays into the hands of the stereotype, which says that lesbians are fickle and too easily able to 'change sides'. Having Lana kissing boys - albeit to apparently cover-up the truth - fuels those who would suggest that lesbianism involves much less commitment than male-homosexuality does, partly due to the lack of penetration.

But, of course, penetration doesn't come into it on Neighbours. Except, of course, if we're discussing Harold's erectile dysfunction.

Part of me wishes they had gone all-out and made their first gay character a teenage boy, who would surely suffer more bullying, teasing and humiliation were he outed than a girl. Yeah, that's right, I said it. While I don't doubt that coming-out, male or female, is very tough, to be a gay-male at a typical Australian high school must be harder than to be a lesbian. There is a certain, if mocking, hero-status that (attractive) females are given when they engage in any kind of pseudo-lesbian behaviour. We see it at pubs, clubs, parties and in the media all the time. Contrast this with the rampant, violent homophobia symptomatic of male social groups (regardless of the homoeroticism - AFL football, I'm looking at you). Male homophobia is based around the 'potential rapists all are we' that Propagandhi sung about. That conceit that all gay men want to have sex with all straight men, as if there were no discretion involved in choosing partners.

And it is for these reasons that I think they have messed up Lana's detractors. They've unwittingly made Lana into a stereotype when they needn't have, and haven't allowed her bullying peers to be the stereotypes they should be. Clearly the writers of Neighbours haven't set foot in a real high school for many a year (neither, for that matter, have the actors) and seem to get all their ideas about peer-pressure from repeats of Degrassi Junior High and Ready or Not. Homophobic bullying is subtle, terrifying and pervasive, not a whole yard of people chanting 'Lana is a lezzo'.

Also, what's with making Boyd anti-lesbian? Clearly his character type hasn't been worked out either, since if Boyd were a real person he'd be exactly the kind to love (the popular neo-depiction of) lesbians. In fact, that whole thing where Boyd and Stingray were talking about homosexuality and Stingray pretty much says 'whatever floats your boat' was terribly written. I guess we have to remember Kate Langbroek at one time wrote for Neighbours.

So, that's my rant. Lana is the only lesbian to set foot in Ramsey St. (she doesn't live there, mind you) and thus has the unenviable onus upon her to represent an entire group. But Neighbours knew what they were getting into. And it's not working so far.

And no, I don't watch Neighbours.

Queen and music videos

In more than one source I have seen the surviving members of Queen say they invented music videos when they had to pre-record them miming to Bohemian Rhapsody to later re-play on Top of the Pops in 1975. It says in their Greatest Hits Dvd booklet: "there were no promotional videos for the first four Queen singles; the medium had not yet been invented".

Aside from the fact that this is just plain wrong, it's also arrogant because they know it's wrong. The Beatles were making promotional videos in the mid 60s so that Ed Sullivan could play them on his American tv show when they weren't in the US. Aside from the obvious - the Beatles made three movies that revolved around music videos (yes, even by today's definition) - they also made free-standing ones for Rain, Paperback Writer, Penny Lane, Strawberry Fields: and these are off the top of my head. And, yes, all made before 1968: before Queen were even a band.

Never mind that Frank Zappa had made '200 Motels' and even Disney had made 'Fantasia'. Never mind that, depending on how far you care to go back, the music video was invented by Eisenstein. Nope, Queen invented the music video. In 1975.