ignorance is bliss (final album mix)

this is a brand new (jan, 2014) construction to replace the previous one, making it the third incarnation. and, if we accept dialectical reasoning, we can conclude it's a final outcome - unless it converts itself into another track altogether.

the thesis here was a fully produced version that included vocals. the antithesis was a minimal version that stripped out most of the production along with the lyrics. this synthesis brings the production back in while leaving the vocals out. i've tried to author my additions while keeping in mind the aesthetic ideals i was attached to in the period. that is to say that while this is a new mix, it belongs to the time the track was created - mid 2000. no new recorded sound has been added.

thesis (vocal mix), antithesis (2004 mix) and an early mix (inristart), as well as a completely different construction of the track, are available here, with write-ups:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/ignorance-is-bliss

i'm just going to talk a little about the specific changes in the 2014 mix. first, i've brought the introductory guitar solo back in, but extended it by reflecting it across the y axis. a backwards solo now follows the first solo. the reason i left it out was that it was written to segue into the vocals. that is to say that when the guitar part ended, the vocals began, and the track carried forward momentum through because of that. removing the vocals left the guitar part as a sort of bridge to nowhere. the extension by means of reflection resolves that issue of continuity, and reintegrates what was an interesting moment in the initial track.

the story around the bass part is sort of funny. the vocal mix actually contains what was a replacement bass part. it's a more playful part. yet, when i wanted to remove the vocals, i was forced to revert to the initial part. at the time, i decided that accepting the less interesting bass part was a valid trade-off for removing the bass. well, why not have two bass parts?

the vocal version also had a funk guitar part that was written to play off against the second bass part. this funk guitar part didn't make sense when contrasted against the initial bass part. yet, as i'm bringing in the second bass part, i can also bring in the funk guitar part.

there were two thunder claps in the vocal version that were inserted as sound effects - the thunder claps when the narrator opens an umbrella. while the first is nonsensical without the vocals, the second has been readded for dramatic effect.

lastly, i had a sequenced "ukelele" part running through the track. well, it's a sampler set up to a ukelele fret board. meaning it's triggering samples based on ukelele chord shapes. this is early 2000, way before that shit was trendy. nor has it ever been trendy in the context of being triggered by a computer. i digress...

it ran all the way through the vocal version, and, in hindsight, i don't know why. the minimal version is superior to the vocal version in this respect; the power of the drum machine drilling away underneath the interstellar synth parts is lost when clouded up by a bunch of goofy ukelele trills. instead, i've targeted the ukelele part to two specific sections: right after the first guitar solo, and leading up to the final swell before the fade.

these are the changes i've made in 2014, all of them with the intent to capture the entirety of the track as it was initially written.

as for the track itself, it's almost indescribable except to point out it's really psychedelic and really electronic and really epic.

created in the spring and summer of 2000. reconstructed in 2004 and again in 2014. final construction is dated to jan 13, 2014.

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/ignorance-is-bliss

i think i'm acting out my mps through facebook profiles, which is hilariously pathetic. so laugh. but i pose a question of some seriousness:

is anglo-american civilization the first civilization in history to have an actual materialist religion?

no. there was previously confucianism.

not to say that the like catholic church or something wasn't materialist, but it still derived it's power from magic. and buddhism may have seemed more materialistic, but it's still deriving consequences from moral actions, by some kind of positive magic.

i think confucianism fits, though.

well, maybe the romans, actually. maybe there was actually a time before theological religion was dominant. so, maybe the first...no, i can't salvage the question.

i'm talking about culture, by the way, not power per se. well, social power, i guess, but not necessarily invested in any particular hierarchy. the mindset that dominates thinking regarding social behaviour, but placed on a footing where it's no longer questioned. i just bullshitted a sociological definition of religion, would you look at that.

even in "secular societies" that sort of social code exists, as derived in some abstraction from the religious law. up until recently, we could talk of anglo-american social values as having been abstracted from christian ones, through however many reinterpretations for however many motives, or through organic shifts in public attitude that yearn towards a different structuring. likewise, you could talk of the more liberal arabic states as having social laws that reflect abstractions of islamic values, and etc.

but is the united states empire (and satellites) now beyond that abstraction and into a really materialist idea of social ordering?

i mean, there's been an appropriation of some of the symbols, but that's a fundamental part of any religious shift in any region. odin carries on as santa claus, the greek mysteries within christianity, stories of great floods in judaism. so, we still have jesus, but it's now a materialist jesus that enforces the laws of social darwinism, wrapped up within (sometimes falsely applied) market rhetoric.

whatever abstraction that was once attached to god seems now to be attached to finance. i mean socially, through the attitudes that exist.

i'm a loud supporter of atheism, but that's kind of not what i had in mind.

anyways, the question does appear foolish. but it is hinting at something that defines the character of the culture of the existing global hegemon, and stands out relative to other recent empires.

i'm now entering my jesus year. i get the feeling it's going to be eventful, but i may be working myself up around the symbolism of it as it relates to my repressed, inner jesus freak. and the symbolism itself is probably contrived number mysticism. but i guess i'll find out.

converting the bible into punk rock language.

"jesus hated the pharisees because they were poseurs."
"yeah, i used to like judas, until he sold out."
"that mountain of laws is just a lot of pretentious bullshit. the golden rule is about keeping it real."
"pilate's behaviour was entirely contrived."

this is a legitimately good idea in an industry that often seems out to lunch. the rush to bring the next-gen battery technology to the market often reduces ecological concerns to a marketing benefit, or, worse, a scam.

there was a cronenberg film that explored the ideas of merging biology with technology to create growing, living plant-based machines. in the end, it's all chemistry. it's electrons transferring; it's energy stored in chemical bonds. there's nothing crazy about returning to carbon from silicon and replacing steel with cellulose. it's the sustainable future.

http://www.eco-business.com/news/green-energy-vegetables-may-help-wind-solar-stem-use-fossil-fuels/

is anglo-american civilization the first civilization in history to have an actual materialist religion?