Wednesday, July 13, 2016
when you meet a wealthy, white girl that says "commercialize sex work. women have agency.", what that actually means is "i have enjoyed a level of privilege through my life that makes me unable to understand the widespread day-to-day scenario where people are coerced into having sex against their free will in order to satiate the greed of the rentier class."
i'm no fan of george bush. i actually think he should be publicly executed - not as deterrent, or even justice, but because his crimes are so great as to justify the vengeance. it should be televised. and, we should party afterwards. but, i think you should back off on him on this - these images suggest a man that is not entirely in control of himself.
i don't know what it is. maybe he choked on another pretzel and is suffering brain damage due to lack of oxygen. but, i don't see disrespectful there. and i don't see drunk, either. i see retarded.
literally.
look at laura. she gives it away.
---
if i can't dance, i don't want to be part of your revolution.
---
i think it's brain damage. dementia. alzheimers. if this is drug related, i think you're looking at prescription drugs.
not even a drunk would do this.
i don't know what it is. maybe he choked on another pretzel and is suffering brain damage due to lack of oxygen. but, i don't see disrespectful there. and i don't see drunk, either. i see retarded.
literally.
look at laura. she gives it away.
---
if i can't dance, i don't want to be part of your revolution.
---
i think it's brain damage. dementia. alzheimers. if this is drug related, i think you're looking at prescription drugs.
not even a drunk would do this.
i don't think you can have this discussion unless you separate between high budget porn and exploitative porn. when people say "porn", they immediately think of what is basically a hollywood industry and just sweep the rest of it under the rug. no, the camera isn't the defining point. but, you just can't draw a parallel between somebody with a career that is making six or seven figures out of it (and has gone through planned surgery to be more competitive...) and somebody filming themselves in a hotel because they have no other way to pay their rent. it's just a crazy discussion, unless you separate out choice from coercion - which is what the law ought to be actually about.
"they keep you drugged with religion and sex and tv"
"and you think you're so clever and classless and free"
"but you're just fucking peasants as far as i can see..."
"they keep you drugged with religion and sex and tv"
"and you think you're so clever and classless and free"
"but you're just fucking peasants as far as i can see..."
12-07-2016: swans.
show footage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meMFTR8eAJc
review:
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2016/07/12.html
tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meMFTR8eAJc
review:
http://dghjdfsghkrdghdgja.appspot.com/categories/shows/2016/07/12.html
tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
Tuesday, July 12, 2016
i just heard a rather clueless irish politician make the claim that "lenin must be spinning in his grave."
really.
http://www.comtourist.com/images/large/lenin-mausoleum/lenin-mausoleum-sarcophagus-03.jpg
really.
http://www.comtourist.com/images/large/lenin-mausoleum/lenin-mausoleum-sarcophagus-03.jpg
if you believe that clinton is opposed to the tpp, wants to ease restrictions on immigration, etc then maybe i'm at 87% agreement. what does a site like this do when faced with a candidate that switches positions every other day? you could actually say the same thing about trump. they're probably both somewhere around 40%.
when i did this four years ago, i had 2% agreement with mitt romney. no joke. then they claimed i had 91% agreement with barack obama. yet, obama and romney were essentially the same candidate. how could i have 91% agreement with obama and 2% agreement with romney, when obama and romney had 98% agreement with each other? the site's a joke.
they also claimed i was 99% in agreement with the greens, but only 88% in agreement with the socialists - implying that they had obama positioned to the left of the socialists.
that other site i posted a few weeks back (political compass) is a lot better. a lot, lot better.
but i was curious, anyways. there it is. even if it's wrong...
when i did this four years ago, i had 2% agreement with mitt romney. no joke. then they claimed i had 91% agreement with barack obama. yet, obama and romney were essentially the same candidate. how could i have 91% agreement with obama and 2% agreement with romney, when obama and romney had 98% agreement with each other? the site's a joke.
they also claimed i was 99% in agreement with the greens, but only 88% in agreement with the socialists - implying that they had obama positioned to the left of the socialists.
that other site i posted a few weeks back (political compass) is a lot better. a lot, lot better.
but i was curious, anyways. there it is. even if it's wrong...
Monday, July 11, 2016
once they've got my attention, then what? i mean, i can buy a shirt, maybe.
it's reflective of a wider loss of plot in the protest movement. people have power to take power through halting or seizing production. they don't just have the power of collective thought. "awareness" is consequently absolutely useless - except to sell a product. and, the results of it are in front of us.
i'm less reacting against the tactic out of support for the status quo, and more because it's just not effective. there's a consistency in my criticism across diverse issues.
we used to understand that the problem of police violence is systemic and intentional and has to be approached by pulling the weed out from the roots. this probably actually does mean targeted assassinations, but at a much higher level than that of day-to-day cops.
the only reason the civil rights movement got anywhere at all was due to open carry. peaceful civil disobedience is merely upholding the status quo. if you want anything to change, you have to scare them.
power only understands power. if you walk in with a flower, you just get stamped out. you can march millions of people through the street every day until the bombs fall, all you're doing is broadcasting that you're harmless. rather, you have to force concessions through the use of force or through the implication of the use of force.
there's been much written about gandhi and game theory. these are the people that actually understand the tactic. marching to the sea was only useful as a tool because it broadcast to the british what the size of a potential army was. and, gandhi himself was explicit: if he could have armed them, he would have. he just lacked the resources. the proper understanding of these tactics, from gandhi himself, was that violence is unnecessary under the threat of violence. and, this is actually the same logic of nuclear deterrence: the threat must be credible in order to be effective.
what these protest movements need to be focusing on is ensuring that the threat they pose to the status quo is actually credible. so long as the focus is on peaceful marching and "raising awareness", they offer no credible threat and therefore are in no position to demand concessions.
the "spirit of protest" that came out of the 60s has been an abject failure, if it wasn't intentional social engineering. if generational change is to have any chance of success, it must reverse the focus on "peaceful protest" and "awareness" and go back to a more directly confrontational and openly belligerent approach. we have to generate a credible level of fear in order to force action. we have to be a credible threat.
if you want to hold to a kind of classical leftist discourse, the modern application is not in citizen protest and civil disobedience, but in organizing police strikes. halting production worked in producing concessions because it broke the system down from the inside. could you imagine non-workers showing up outside the factory and demanding concessions? lower prices, perhaps? they would have been laughed at.
these protesters are being laughed at....
the idea is that any complex system requires it's constituent subsystems in order to function properly. it's really good old fashioned materialism, right. so, you can break the system by breaking the subsystem. therefore, organizing strikes is a good tactic. what is breaking down when you send citizens out to block a highway? are you threatening a general strike? you're not, really. not credibly, anyways. and, the likelihood of it ever being credible is so remote...
but, if you could organize a police strike then you'd be effectively "halting production" and the system would have to react with concessions, or risk collapse.
yeah, i know. not very "moral". no faith in class harmony, state enforcement of the rule of law or market interactions as a way to organize society. kind of dangerous, perhaps. so, not very "conservative". kind of left-wing, even, huh?
it's reflective of a wider loss of plot in the protest movement. people have power to take power through halting or seizing production. they don't just have the power of collective thought. "awareness" is consequently absolutely useless - except to sell a product. and, the results of it are in front of us.
i'm less reacting against the tactic out of support for the status quo, and more because it's just not effective. there's a consistency in my criticism across diverse issues.
we used to understand that the problem of police violence is systemic and intentional and has to be approached by pulling the weed out from the roots. this probably actually does mean targeted assassinations, but at a much higher level than that of day-to-day cops.
the only reason the civil rights movement got anywhere at all was due to open carry. peaceful civil disobedience is merely upholding the status quo. if you want anything to change, you have to scare them.
power only understands power. if you walk in with a flower, you just get stamped out. you can march millions of people through the street every day until the bombs fall, all you're doing is broadcasting that you're harmless. rather, you have to force concessions through the use of force or through the implication of the use of force.
there's been much written about gandhi and game theory. these are the people that actually understand the tactic. marching to the sea was only useful as a tool because it broadcast to the british what the size of a potential army was. and, gandhi himself was explicit: if he could have armed them, he would have. he just lacked the resources. the proper understanding of these tactics, from gandhi himself, was that violence is unnecessary under the threat of violence. and, this is actually the same logic of nuclear deterrence: the threat must be credible in order to be effective.
what these protest movements need to be focusing on is ensuring that the threat they pose to the status quo is actually credible. so long as the focus is on peaceful marching and "raising awareness", they offer no credible threat and therefore are in no position to demand concessions.
the "spirit of protest" that came out of the 60s has been an abject failure, if it wasn't intentional social engineering. if generational change is to have any chance of success, it must reverse the focus on "peaceful protest" and "awareness" and go back to a more directly confrontational and openly belligerent approach. we have to generate a credible level of fear in order to force action. we have to be a credible threat.
if you want to hold to a kind of classical leftist discourse, the modern application is not in citizen protest and civil disobedience, but in organizing police strikes. halting production worked in producing concessions because it broke the system down from the inside. could you imagine non-workers showing up outside the factory and demanding concessions? lower prices, perhaps? they would have been laughed at.
these protesters are being laughed at....
the idea is that any complex system requires it's constituent subsystems in order to function properly. it's really good old fashioned materialism, right. so, you can break the system by breaking the subsystem. therefore, organizing strikes is a good tactic. what is breaking down when you send citizens out to block a highway? are you threatening a general strike? you're not, really. not credibly, anyways. and, the likelihood of it ever being credible is so remote...
but, if you could organize a police strike then you'd be effectively "halting production" and the system would have to react with concessions, or risk collapse.
yeah, i know. not very "moral". no faith in class harmony, state enforcement of the rule of law or market interactions as a way to organize society. kind of dangerous, perhaps. so, not very "conservative". kind of left-wing, even, huh?
finalizing hey god (inri008)
audio permanently closed for inri008.
==
my recollection of the initial recording of this track is unfortunately somewhat vague. when we push our memories like i'm trying to, we become more likely to imagine the past in terms that never actually existed. so, how real is this vague memory of wanting to hear some backwards guitars? i fear that it's perilous to try and force my mind to be more specific.
it's at least fully consistent with what i know about the situation. this was initially the second track recorded in my basement studio in the fall of 1996. so, i was still at the point where i was looking to try things in the studio for the first time. as for backwards guitars? i was very interested in both zappa and hendrix (two of my biggest guitar influences) at the time, and that is actually blatantly obvious if you listen to inri000. they both used backwards guitars. there are multiple occasions on inri000 (and afterwards...) where the nods to both of these players are beyond heavy-sleeved. so, my vague memory at the very least makes sense.
how i made the jump from trying to create a backwards guitar solo to turning a song into a palindrome is another question and i don't really have a good answer besides stumbling upon it as i was listening to it. clearly, it is the case that this struck me as a good idea at some point along the way.
when i went to recreate the track in early 1998, i felt the need to recreate the palindrome effect. so, i never saved any version of the track in forward order (without the backwards overdub) or released it in any kind of way. for all these years, there has simply never been a forwards version of the track.
the remastering process over 2015 has finally given me the opportunity to create a forwards version and spin it off as a single for the express reason of documenting the track as it was actually initially written, which was as a fairly straight forward alternative pop song. that's a description that i do believe is very old. yet, i may be imagining the past, too...
the new album mix is a palindrome, as it always has been. the electronics mix is constructed using the same algorithm. the backwards mix is just literally that. combined together, the forwards and backwards mixes create the album version. the 2013 remasters are appended as bonuses.
initially written in 1996. recreated in feb, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 15, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. finalized on july 11, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
regarding the subject matter of the deleted vocals/lyrics, please see the following vlog (which is also available on inriℵ0).
credits
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, digital wave editing, loops, vocals, drum kit, tapes, production
released february 11, 1998
==
my recollection of the initial recording of this track is unfortunately somewhat vague. when we push our memories like i'm trying to, we become more likely to imagine the past in terms that never actually existed. so, how real is this vague memory of wanting to hear some backwards guitars? i fear that it's perilous to try and force my mind to be more specific.
it's at least fully consistent with what i know about the situation. this was initially the second track recorded in my basement studio in the fall of 1996. so, i was still at the point where i was looking to try things in the studio for the first time. as for backwards guitars? i was very interested in both zappa and hendrix (two of my biggest guitar influences) at the time, and that is actually blatantly obvious if you listen to inri000. they both used backwards guitars. there are multiple occasions on inri000 (and afterwards...) where the nods to both of these players are beyond heavy-sleeved. so, my vague memory at the very least makes sense.
how i made the jump from trying to create a backwards guitar solo to turning a song into a palindrome is another question and i don't really have a good answer besides stumbling upon it as i was listening to it. clearly, it is the case that this struck me as a good idea at some point along the way.
when i went to recreate the track in early 1998, i felt the need to recreate the palindrome effect. so, i never saved any version of the track in forward order (without the backwards overdub) or released it in any kind of way. for all these years, there has simply never been a forwards version of the track.
the remastering process over 2015 has finally given me the opportunity to create a forwards version and spin it off as a single for the express reason of documenting the track as it was actually initially written, which was as a fairly straight forward alternative pop song. that's a description that i do believe is very old. yet, i may be imagining the past, too...
the new album mix is a palindrome, as it always has been. the electronics mix is constructed using the same algorithm. the backwards mix is just literally that. combined together, the forwards and backwards mixes create the album version. the 2013 remasters are appended as bonuses.
initially written in 1996. recreated in feb, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 15, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. finalized on july 11, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
regarding the subject matter of the deleted vocals/lyrics, please see the following vlog (which is also available on inriℵ0).
credits
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, digital wave editing, loops, vocals, drum kit, tapes, production
released february 11, 1998
see, i should be more angry about this than i am. the reason is that i know that this is not a serious commitment. if i thought it was a serious commitment, i'd be livid. it was stupid for us to let the baltic states into nato, and i'd rather kick them out than defend them. i don't want to see a single canadian soldier harmed to defend latvia. if the purpose of nato is now to keep the russians out of their own sphere, then i'm in favour of immediate withdrawal.
latvia is in the russian sphere. the russians will ultimately prevail. it is nothing short of belligerent stupidity to argue otherwise.
but, i know it's just politics.
what i find more interesting is the media narrative. who did they write this article for? the texan association of american veterans? it's just completely disconnected from any concept of canadian self-identity.
canadians don't want to be global protectors, we want to be global mediators.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cananda-nato-baltic-troops-1.3669952
keep this up, justin, and we're looking at prime minister naomi klein....
latvia is in the russian sphere. the russians will ultimately prevail. it is nothing short of belligerent stupidity to argue otherwise.
but, i know it's just politics.
what i find more interesting is the media narrative. who did they write this article for? the texan association of american veterans? it's just completely disconnected from any concept of canadian self-identity.
canadians don't want to be global protectors, we want to be global mediators.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cananda-nato-baltic-troops-1.3669952
keep this up, justin, and we're looking at prime minister naomi klein....
they basically had the perfect comment system before they broke up the integration with google+, which was self-moderation. what that does is let the owner of the comment moderate their own comments. and, let's be clear here - i own this comment. not you. you own the space, so you have the right to remove it. but, it's my thread. this was pleasantly anarchist, but far too complicated for people to understand...
as for your channel. do you have the responsibility to moderate it? yes. it's your channel. might that mean hiring somebody? maybe, it might, yeah.
the absolute last thing that i want is some fucking bureaucrat at youtube deciding what can and cannot appear in my comments section. and, if you think that the system won't fall into censorship...well, you're fucking swedish. you grew up in a totalitarian dystopia.
keep the thought police out of north america. thanks.
as for your channel. do you have the responsibility to moderate it? yes. it's your channel. might that mean hiring somebody? maybe, it might, yeah.
the absolute last thing that i want is some fucking bureaucrat at youtube deciding what can and cannot appear in my comments section. and, if you think that the system won't fall into censorship...well, you're fucking swedish. you grew up in a totalitarian dystopia.
keep the thought police out of north america. thanks.
Sunday, July 10, 2016
j reacts to an example of how my life experiences are very un-millennial
i need to reiterate: i'm not a millennial. i've never claimed to be a millennial. in fact, i've repeatedly rejected the claim. i'm rejecting the claim right now, even. i don't have life experiences that can be associated with that generation. yes: i happen to look 10-15 years younger than i am. but, i am not of it. i am of my own age.
i can only continue to explain why i'm not a millennial and hope it eventually gets acknowledged
--
i will say that growing up in the squeeze like this has kind of taken away the present. when i was a teen, it seemed like i had the choice to exaggerate the length of my childhood or end up as 15-going-on-27, which was what i did and was particularly abrasive given the arrested development i was coming out of. i never really felt like i had the option of being a teenager.
when i was in my 20s, i felt like i had the option of staying behind in my teens with the millennials (which meant living it the first time...) or jumping ahead to my 30s. i ended up making both choices, in sequence.
likewise, my thirties have felt like i have the choice between living my 20s the first time (which i think i did, during occupy) or living my 40s early (which i've been doing the last few years).
maybe i'll find a money tree out in the yard and live my thirties in my early 40s, then jump to my fifties at 45? such is the nature of the generational cusp.
but, as of right now? i'm 35 with the life experiences of a 45 year old. 35-going-on-47. and absolutely content with it.
i can only continue to explain why i'm not a millennial and hope it eventually gets acknowledged
--
i will say that growing up in the squeeze like this has kind of taken away the present. when i was a teen, it seemed like i had the choice to exaggerate the length of my childhood or end up as 15-going-on-27, which was what i did and was particularly abrasive given the arrested development i was coming out of. i never really felt like i had the option of being a teenager.
when i was in my 20s, i felt like i had the option of staying behind in my teens with the millennials (which meant living it the first time...) or jumping ahead to my 30s. i ended up making both choices, in sequence.
likewise, my thirties have felt like i have the choice between living my 20s the first time (which i think i did, during occupy) or living my 40s early (which i've been doing the last few years).
maybe i'll find a money tree out in the yard and live my thirties in my early 40s, then jump to my fifties at 45? such is the nature of the generational cusp.
but, as of right now? i'm 35 with the life experiences of a 45 year old. 35-going-on-47. and absolutely content with it.
finalizing confused (inri007)
audio permanently closed for inri007.
===
so, how exactly does one go about being transgendered, anyways? i mean, like anything else, i guess you have to come to terms with it, first. then, what?
it was the "what next?" part that took me a very long time to grapple with before i was able to come to some kind of course of action. i don't remember exactly how old i was when i realized that i was more like a girl than a boy, but i will state that my thought process was always that i was like a girl, rather than that i was a girl. i have to be blunt: i was a precocious child. i understood the biology of sexual organs at a pretty young age. i knew which organ i had, that it was the same as the one my dad had and that it was different than my mom. i never felt as though i was in the wrong body - that's not how i'd articulate it. i knew i was male. but, all my friends were girls. i preferred to do "girl things". so, i realized at a very, very young age that i was more similar to the girls in my life than to the boys, despite being well aware that i was genetically a boy. it functioned more on the level of social inclusion and conscious choice of gender role than it did on the level of anything biological. am i really that atypical? i don't know. but, i know that i never had any difficulty at all, whatsoever, in separating between sex, gender and gender roles. so, for example: i have very early memories of asking my mom to let me wear lipstick, and of asking to get my ears pierced (3,4 years old) but i don't attach those memories to feelings of gender dysphoria. i didn't see any reason why boys couldn't wear make-up. further, nobody really "corrected" me on it. so, i grew up without any shame or second thoughts attached to being a boy that was more like a girl, and consequently without any particularly strong urges to become a girl. my very early life actually finds it's best explanation in the theories of radical feminism: because the gender binary was never enforced on me, i never felt oppressed by it. i have to argue for a very healthy early upbringing.
what screwed me up and set me back a good ten years was the school system. when i got there at the age of four and a half, i wouldn't talk to the boys. i wanted to skip rope and play hopscotch with the girls. well, all my friends were girls. i didn't know how to play with the boys. what's a marble? i just didn't know. i got stuck with a fossil of a kindergarten teacher that actually flat out banned me from skipping rope. worse, she banned me from reading books. my absolutely docile and clinically rational temperament at that age probably worked against me. but, i had two choices: i could play with the trucks with the boys in the corner or i could go to sleep.
in fact, i slept a lot.
but, gradually, the system socialized me as a male. or, at least it seemed like it did.
my path through elementary school didn't really ease up on the gender segregation until the seventh grade, at which point it was essentially too late. the system had successfully prevented me from socializing with girls, but had never taught me how to socialize with boys. so, i had spent the last twelve years of school in social isolation, usually without any friends at all. i'd lost the opportunity to have all the gendered experiences one associates with childhood - which means i was deeply socially stunted. i was still pretty smart, academically speaking. however, i was operating at the social level of a much younger child because the school system had arrested my social development through segregating me into a gender role that i didn't understand how to fulfill.
by the time i got around to writing this song at the age of 16, i'd just become entirely stoic about the whole thing. i knew i was more like a girl, but what exactly was i going to do about it? i guess i had the perspective, at 16, that life was largely about managing misfortune and you just have to deal with shit, whether you like it or not.
rational? perhaps, from a certain perspective. it gnawed at me, though. the trauma underlying the track was the realization that i was a good part of the way through puberty, without ever having signed up for it. this was by no means unexpected, either, and i didn't ultimately feel that i had any recourse of action in preventing it. but, i felt like i'd been cheated out of something and was being forced into something i didn't remotely want.
as with the rest of the early tracks, the lyrics here are at their core the exploration of a morbid fantasy. i'm taking things too far, i'm taking any excuse i can to keep taking things too far and i'm enjoying watching you squirm when i do it. in one sense, it's a sarcastic allegory on the question of thinking with one's cock, which is a bio-chemical problem that all testosterone producers are forced to come to terms with at some point. in another sense, it's a transgendered teenager carrying out a sort of morbid fantasy and desperately looking for a way to prevent the masculinization of my body.
it took me another five years or so of internal struggle before i could get to the point where i saw hormone therapy as a realistic option, rather than a kind of utopian fantasy that would be perpetually out of reach until i finally expired.
this is the only period 1 piece that was further expanded through the addition of some bass and piano sequencing near the start of the piece. the vocals were also brought back in without redaction. so, this ep starts off with a full reconstruction of the piece that is only available on this single. the ep further comprehensively documents all other released versions of the track.
initially written in 1997. recreated in feb, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed july 5, 2015. remixed july 12, 2015. electronics added on july 16, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. sequenced on jan 6-8, 2016. finalized on july 10, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, vocals, synthesizers, drum programming, drum kit, sequencing, sampling, digital wave editing, production
released february 6, 1998
===
so, how exactly does one go about being transgendered, anyways? i mean, like anything else, i guess you have to come to terms with it, first. then, what?
it was the "what next?" part that took me a very long time to grapple with before i was able to come to some kind of course of action. i don't remember exactly how old i was when i realized that i was more like a girl than a boy, but i will state that my thought process was always that i was like a girl, rather than that i was a girl. i have to be blunt: i was a precocious child. i understood the biology of sexual organs at a pretty young age. i knew which organ i had, that it was the same as the one my dad had and that it was different than my mom. i never felt as though i was in the wrong body - that's not how i'd articulate it. i knew i was male. but, all my friends were girls. i preferred to do "girl things". so, i realized at a very, very young age that i was more similar to the girls in my life than to the boys, despite being well aware that i was genetically a boy. it functioned more on the level of social inclusion and conscious choice of gender role than it did on the level of anything biological. am i really that atypical? i don't know. but, i know that i never had any difficulty at all, whatsoever, in separating between sex, gender and gender roles. so, for example: i have very early memories of asking my mom to let me wear lipstick, and of asking to get my ears pierced (3,4 years old) but i don't attach those memories to feelings of gender dysphoria. i didn't see any reason why boys couldn't wear make-up. further, nobody really "corrected" me on it. so, i grew up without any shame or second thoughts attached to being a boy that was more like a girl, and consequently without any particularly strong urges to become a girl. my very early life actually finds it's best explanation in the theories of radical feminism: because the gender binary was never enforced on me, i never felt oppressed by it. i have to argue for a very healthy early upbringing.
what screwed me up and set me back a good ten years was the school system. when i got there at the age of four and a half, i wouldn't talk to the boys. i wanted to skip rope and play hopscotch with the girls. well, all my friends were girls. i didn't know how to play with the boys. what's a marble? i just didn't know. i got stuck with a fossil of a kindergarten teacher that actually flat out banned me from skipping rope. worse, she banned me from reading books. my absolutely docile and clinically rational temperament at that age probably worked against me. but, i had two choices: i could play with the trucks with the boys in the corner or i could go to sleep.
in fact, i slept a lot.
but, gradually, the system socialized me as a male. or, at least it seemed like it did.
my path through elementary school didn't really ease up on the gender segregation until the seventh grade, at which point it was essentially too late. the system had successfully prevented me from socializing with girls, but had never taught me how to socialize with boys. so, i had spent the last twelve years of school in social isolation, usually without any friends at all. i'd lost the opportunity to have all the gendered experiences one associates with childhood - which means i was deeply socially stunted. i was still pretty smart, academically speaking. however, i was operating at the social level of a much younger child because the school system had arrested my social development through segregating me into a gender role that i didn't understand how to fulfill.
by the time i got around to writing this song at the age of 16, i'd just become entirely stoic about the whole thing. i knew i was more like a girl, but what exactly was i going to do about it? i guess i had the perspective, at 16, that life was largely about managing misfortune and you just have to deal with shit, whether you like it or not.
rational? perhaps, from a certain perspective. it gnawed at me, though. the trauma underlying the track was the realization that i was a good part of the way through puberty, without ever having signed up for it. this was by no means unexpected, either, and i didn't ultimately feel that i had any recourse of action in preventing it. but, i felt like i'd been cheated out of something and was being forced into something i didn't remotely want.
as with the rest of the early tracks, the lyrics here are at their core the exploration of a morbid fantasy. i'm taking things too far, i'm taking any excuse i can to keep taking things too far and i'm enjoying watching you squirm when i do it. in one sense, it's a sarcastic allegory on the question of thinking with one's cock, which is a bio-chemical problem that all testosterone producers are forced to come to terms with at some point. in another sense, it's a transgendered teenager carrying out a sort of morbid fantasy and desperately looking for a way to prevent the masculinization of my body.
it took me another five years or so of internal struggle before i could get to the point where i saw hormone therapy as a realistic option, rather than a kind of utopian fantasy that would be perpetually out of reach until i finally expired.
this is the only period 1 piece that was further expanded through the addition of some bass and piano sequencing near the start of the piece. the vocals were also brought back in without redaction. so, this ep starts off with a full reconstruction of the piece that is only available on this single. the ep further comprehensively documents all other released versions of the track.
initially written in 1997. recreated in feb, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed july 5, 2015. remixed july 12, 2015. electronics added on july 16, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. sequenced on jan 6-8, 2016. finalized on july 10, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, vocals, synthesizers, drum programming, drum kit, sequencing, sampling, digital wave editing, production
released february 6, 1998
Saturday, July 9, 2016
it may be accidental, but there's a danger here - because most thinking people will see he's right. on the other hand, i'm not sure how many people actually care about the emails.
i mean, i know the premise is that he's dwelling on "bad media" when he has the opportunity to "deflect". i'm just not sure that i agree with the premise. he may, in the end, get a better upside by pushing back against childish media coverage than hitting hillary on an email story that all evidence suggests is unimportant to most people.
i mean, what's the track record up to this point? first, he does very well when he pushes back against this kind of contrived media garbage - and let's be real, that's what it is. nobody actually thinks he tweeted a star of david. second, the emails haven't actually hurt hillary at all.
i don't want to push back on the claim that trump is lacking in intellect. but, this is the one thing that he's actually good at. did he actually make the right choice on what story will resonate more? we'll see what happens.
i mean, i know the premise is that he's dwelling on "bad media" when he has the opportunity to "deflect". i'm just not sure that i agree with the premise. he may, in the end, get a better upside by pushing back against childish media coverage than hitting hillary on an email story that all evidence suggests is unimportant to most people.
i mean, what's the track record up to this point? first, he does very well when he pushes back against this kind of contrived media garbage - and let's be real, that's what it is. nobody actually thinks he tweeted a star of david. second, the emails haven't actually hurt hillary at all.
i don't want to push back on the claim that trump is lacking in intellect. but, this is the one thing that he's actually good at. did he actually make the right choice on what story will resonate more? we'll see what happens.
j reacts to the absence of ministerial responsibility in the united states?
i just want to point out, on the clinton case, that i'm learning that this is a concept that does not exist in the united states. i think that the (supposedly false) westminister assumption of ministerial responsibility may have affected my understanding of the legal proceedings.
the argument that they're throwing around - she's not responsible because she didn't know - would not be successful in canada. as secretary of state, she would be expected to have oversight over her employees and be expected to take responsibility for any errors that they make. the defense of incompetence would simply be taken at face value, and both be discarded legally and used against her politically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_ministerial_responsibility
the argument that they're throwing around - she's not responsible because she didn't know - would not be successful in canada. as secretary of state, she would be expected to have oversight over her employees and be expected to take responsibility for any errors that they make. the defense of incompetence would simply be taken at face value, and both be discarded legally and used against her politically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_ministerial_responsibility
j reacts to the general election choices, one last time
i need to reiterate that i'm not picking a side in clinton v trump and would suggest you vote for the green party if you live in the united states. i would especially encourage you to vote greens if you are in a swing state, in order to send the message to the democrats that clinton is an unacceptable candidate and that candidates like her, in the future, will fail. voting a protest party in a safe riding is meaningless. it's the swing states that give you the better opportunity to send the message that the democrats need to change, or they're going to have to get used to losing.
so, if you're here looking for political analysis then you're going to be disappointed. i may stop to spit, essentially - to react in disgust. but, i have no interest in these choices or see any use in ranking them.
so, if you're here looking for political analysis then you're going to be disappointed. i may stop to spit, essentially - to react in disgust. but, i have no interest in these choices or see any use in ranking them.
Friday, July 8, 2016
j reacts to the administrative review, and why it will define clinton's presidency
ok. so, it seems like i was right that the locus of opposition was in the "security establishment", but it seems like they've concluded that hillary clinton had no meaningful oversight over her staff. that is, it seems like they've concluded that she's not any real threat to national security, because she had no idea what they were doing. it's up to the political process to establish that oversight, i guess. which is what was "happening".
instead, they're focusing on a systemic review to make concrete changes to prevent the situation from occurring again.
startlingly rational, given the discourse.
i remain convinced that they were willing to press charges until the last minute. did the clintons propose the terms of the deal in the end? they're all lawyers, right?
here's the thing: even if the clintons proposed this course of action, it's not a particularly poor one. it happens to have the happy coincidence of a dropped investigation. but, it's the proper systemic reaction. the only questionable part of it is whether clinton was really that unaware.
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36742095
instead, they're focusing on a systemic review to make concrete changes to prevent the situation from occurring again.
startlingly rational, given the discourse.
i remain convinced that they were willing to press charges until the last minute. did the clintons propose the terms of the deal in the end? they're all lawyers, right?
here's the thing: even if the clintons proposed this course of action, it's not a particularly poor one. it happens to have the happy coincidence of a dropped investigation. but, it's the proper systemic reaction. the only questionable part of it is whether clinton was really that unaware.
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36742095
Thursday, July 7, 2016
finalizing useless (inri006)
audio permanently closed for inri006.
==
the christmas of 1997 was a good one. in addition to getting a four-track recorder to multitrack with, i also ended up with a jx-8p for my birthday, which is in early january. now that i could use the computer a little bit, i decided that i was finally ready to do some serious recording.
i had committed myself to reapproaching the first demo tapes and rerecording certain tracks to reflect the uplift that they got from the drum machine; that is, i had already dramatically rewritten most of the tracks around the drum machine, so i felt i should rerecord them. now, i was going to need to uplift some of those tracks a second time with synthesizer parts. i knew which tracks i wanted to approach and how, but i wanted to ease myself in a little. so, i picked a new track as my first synthesizer experiment.
that is a large part of what this track is. i had the lyrics pre-written, actually, and knew that i wanted a spooky kind of atmosphere to the track. so, i was approaching the synth with the question of how to manipulate it into sounding "haunted". that may seem trivial, but please realize that i had never seen an actual synthesizer before - i'd just always used the presets on my sister's electronic piano. it was a small victory to get the patch by increasing the sustain on the preset, but it was a hard-fought battle.
after i got the track mixed down through the 4-track and mastered into the pc by sending the signal into the back of the soundblaster, some listening had me wishing that i had slowed the tape down a little. the track is a kind of a child's understanding of the existential, which i just felt would be more aesthetically in balance if i slowed the tape down and made it seem a bit more mournful. so, i wanted to go back and remaster it with the speed set a little slower.
i decided i should test it by slowing the track down digitally, first. what i was trying to do was get an estimate to use to remaster it at a different speed. i took a guess on half-speed to try and was going to incrementally reduce the reduction through trial and error until i got to a good point. then, i could set the tape speed by ear. i did not go through that process; i stopped at half-speed. for several weeks in 1998, the half-speed version was the final product for the track. i believe i even uploaded it to mp3.com slowed down this way.
i just instantly stopped at half-speed because, while the effect was more exaggerated than intended, that exaggeration was to greater effect than i imagined. i wasn't expecting the guitars to get that grungy, or the vocals to get that deep. when i heard it, though, i knew that this was the track.
in the end, i reverted back to the normal speed version, but this was done with much internal division. the reason that this is the last track on the demo is because i was holding out for space for the lengthier version. it was only due to a combination of space requirements and pull for conformity of sound through the demo that had me relent at the very end.
in hindsight, i do think that the short version fits better on the flow of the cd, and it will remain there - minus the vocals. yet, i also think that this slowed down version deserves it's own document. i've slowed down two other versions of the track, as well, to drag out the fun. the album version closes this collection.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and then manipulated further in the summer of 2016. released & finalized on july 7, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0.
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, synths, drum programming, vocals, digital wave manipulation, production
released january 22, 1998
==
the christmas of 1997 was a good one. in addition to getting a four-track recorder to multitrack with, i also ended up with a jx-8p for my birthday, which is in early january. now that i could use the computer a little bit, i decided that i was finally ready to do some serious recording.
i had committed myself to reapproaching the first demo tapes and rerecording certain tracks to reflect the uplift that they got from the drum machine; that is, i had already dramatically rewritten most of the tracks around the drum machine, so i felt i should rerecord them. now, i was going to need to uplift some of those tracks a second time with synthesizer parts. i knew which tracks i wanted to approach and how, but i wanted to ease myself in a little. so, i picked a new track as my first synthesizer experiment.
that is a large part of what this track is. i had the lyrics pre-written, actually, and knew that i wanted a spooky kind of atmosphere to the track. so, i was approaching the synth with the question of how to manipulate it into sounding "haunted". that may seem trivial, but please realize that i had never seen an actual synthesizer before - i'd just always used the presets on my sister's electronic piano. it was a small victory to get the patch by increasing the sustain on the preset, but it was a hard-fought battle.
after i got the track mixed down through the 4-track and mastered into the pc by sending the signal into the back of the soundblaster, some listening had me wishing that i had slowed the tape down a little. the track is a kind of a child's understanding of the existential, which i just felt would be more aesthetically in balance if i slowed the tape down and made it seem a bit more mournful. so, i wanted to go back and remaster it with the speed set a little slower.
i decided i should test it by slowing the track down digitally, first. what i was trying to do was get an estimate to use to remaster it at a different speed. i took a guess on half-speed to try and was going to incrementally reduce the reduction through trial and error until i got to a good point. then, i could set the tape speed by ear. i did not go through that process; i stopped at half-speed. for several weeks in 1998, the half-speed version was the final product for the track. i believe i even uploaded it to mp3.com slowed down this way.
i just instantly stopped at half-speed because, while the effect was more exaggerated than intended, that exaggeration was to greater effect than i imagined. i wasn't expecting the guitars to get that grungy, or the vocals to get that deep. when i heard it, though, i knew that this was the track.
in the end, i reverted back to the normal speed version, but this was done with much internal division. the reason that this is the last track on the demo is because i was holding out for space for the lengthier version. it was only due to a combination of space requirements and pull for conformity of sound through the demo that had me relent at the very end.
in hindsight, i do think that the short version fits better on the flow of the cd, and it will remain there - minus the vocals. yet, i also think that this slowed down version deserves it's own document. i've slowed down two other versions of the track, as well, to drag out the fun. the album version closes this collection.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and then manipulated further in the summer of 2016. released & finalized on july 7, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0.
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, synths, drum programming, vocals, digital wave manipulation, production
released january 22, 1998
publishing useless (inri006)
inri006.
this is totally self-indulgent, but so long as i'm generating releases with wanton disregard, i figured i'd might as well.
when i mixed this track in 1998, i was drawn to the idea of slowing it down. i reversed that decision for the sake of the flow of the record, which turned out to be very synth-pop. but, i always wanted to release the track tuned down like this.
i've had this slow version sitting on my hard drive, waiting for a use, since 1998. in mono. i've listened to it over this period. it's truly the better embodiment of the piece. the absurdity is more powerful.
i've put together an ep consisting of three valium mixes and the instrumental mix that will end up on the record. remember: this is how i always wanted to release this track.
===
the christmas of 1997 was a good one. in addition to getting a four-track recorder to multitrack with, i also ended up with a jx-8p for my birthday, which is in early january. now that i could use the computer a little bit, i decided that i was finally ready to do some serious recording.
i had committed myself to reapproaching the first demo tapes and rerecording certain tracks to reflect the uplift that they got from the drum machine; that is, i had already dramatically rewritten most of the tracks around the drum machine, so i felt i should rerecord them. now, i was going to need to uplift some of those tracks a second time with synthesizer parts. i knew which tracks i wanted to approach and how, but i wanted to ease myself in a little. so, i picked a new track as my first synthesizer experiment.
that is a large part of what this track is. i had the lyrics pre-written, actually, and knew that i wanted a spooky kind of atmosphere to the track. so, i was approaching the synth with the question of how to manipulate it into sounding "haunted". that may seem trivial, but please realize that i had never seen an actual synthesizer before - i'd just always used the presets on my sister's electronic piano. it was a small victory to get the patch by increasing the sustain on the preset, but it was a hard-fought battle.
after i got the track mixed down through the 4-track and mastered into the pc by sending the signal into the back of the soundblaster, some listening had me wishing that i had slowed the tape down a little. the track is a kind of a child's understanding of the existential, which i just felt would be more aesthetically in balance if i slowed the tape down and made it seem a bit more mournful. so, i wanted to go back and remaster it with the speed set a little slower.
i decided i should test it by slowing the track down digitally, first. what i was trying to do was get an estimate to use to remaster it at a different speed. i took a guess on half-speed to try and was going to incrementally reduce the reduction through trial and error until i got to a good point. then, i could set the tape speed by ear. i did not go through that process; i stopped at half-speed. for several weeks in 1998, the half-speed version was the final product for the track. i believe i even uploaded it to mp3.com slowed down this way.
i just instantly stopped at half-speed because, while the effect was more exaggerated than intended, that exaggeration was to greater effect than i imagined. i wasn't expecting the guitars to get that grungy, or the vocals to get that deep. when i heard it, though, i knew that this was the track.
in the end, i reverted back to the normal speed version, but this was done with much internal division. the reason that this is the last track on the demo is because i was holding out for space for the lengthier version. it was only due to a combination of space requirements and pull for conformity of sound through the demo that had me relent at the very end.
in hindsight, i do think that the short version fits better on the flow of the cd, and it will remain there - minus the vocals. yet, i also think that this slowed down version deserves it's own document. i've slowed down two other versions of the track, as well, to drag out the fun. the album version closes this collection.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and then manipulated further in the summer of 2016. released on july 7, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0.
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits
j - guitars, effects, bass, synths, drum programming, vocals, digital wave manipulation, production
released january 22, 1998
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/useless
1) this is the original version slowed down to half speed. created on jan 21, 1998. converted to stereo on sept 24, 2014.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-2
2) originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. slowed down and run through a click reducer on july 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-from-2013-remaster
3) recorded in jan, 1998. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 2, 2015. slowed down july 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/use-value-is-somewhat-difficult-to-define-in-the-human-propensity-towards-artistic-expression-slowed-down
4) recorded in jan, 1998. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 2, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/use-value-is-somewhat-difficult-to-define-in-the-human-propensity-towards-artistic-expression-2
5) kind of a new wave / synth pop track. this is the first track with my new synth on it. that's a large part of what the track is. recorded in jan, 1998. sped-up on july 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-sped-up-2
6) deleted 2013 remaster of 1998 demo cd. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-2013-remaster-2
this is totally self-indulgent, but so long as i'm generating releases with wanton disregard, i figured i'd might as well.
when i mixed this track in 1998, i was drawn to the idea of slowing it down. i reversed that decision for the sake of the flow of the record, which turned out to be very synth-pop. but, i always wanted to release the track tuned down like this.
i've had this slow version sitting on my hard drive, waiting for a use, since 1998. in mono. i've listened to it over this period. it's truly the better embodiment of the piece. the absurdity is more powerful.
i've put together an ep consisting of three valium mixes and the instrumental mix that will end up on the record. remember: this is how i always wanted to release this track.
===
the christmas of 1997 was a good one. in addition to getting a four-track recorder to multitrack with, i also ended up with a jx-8p for my birthday, which is in early january. now that i could use the computer a little bit, i decided that i was finally ready to do some serious recording.
i had committed myself to reapproaching the first demo tapes and rerecording certain tracks to reflect the uplift that they got from the drum machine; that is, i had already dramatically rewritten most of the tracks around the drum machine, so i felt i should rerecord them. now, i was going to need to uplift some of those tracks a second time with synthesizer parts. i knew which tracks i wanted to approach and how, but i wanted to ease myself in a little. so, i picked a new track as my first synthesizer experiment.
that is a large part of what this track is. i had the lyrics pre-written, actually, and knew that i wanted a spooky kind of atmosphere to the track. so, i was approaching the synth with the question of how to manipulate it into sounding "haunted". that may seem trivial, but please realize that i had never seen an actual synthesizer before - i'd just always used the presets on my sister's electronic piano. it was a small victory to get the patch by increasing the sustain on the preset, but it was a hard-fought battle.
after i got the track mixed down through the 4-track and mastered into the pc by sending the signal into the back of the soundblaster, some listening had me wishing that i had slowed the tape down a little. the track is a kind of a child's understanding of the existential, which i just felt would be more aesthetically in balance if i slowed the tape down and made it seem a bit more mournful. so, i wanted to go back and remaster it with the speed set a little slower.
i decided i should test it by slowing the track down digitally, first. what i was trying to do was get an estimate to use to remaster it at a different speed. i took a guess on half-speed to try and was going to incrementally reduce the reduction through trial and error until i got to a good point. then, i could set the tape speed by ear. i did not go through that process; i stopped at half-speed. for several weeks in 1998, the half-speed version was the final product for the track. i believe i even uploaded it to mp3.com slowed down this way.
i just instantly stopped at half-speed because, while the effect was more exaggerated than intended, that exaggeration was to greater effect than i imagined. i wasn't expecting the guitars to get that grungy, or the vocals to get that deep. when i heard it, though, i knew that this was the track.
in the end, i reverted back to the normal speed version, but this was done with much internal division. the reason that this is the last track on the demo is because i was holding out for space for the lengthier version. it was only due to a combination of space requirements and pull for conformity of sound through the demo that had me relent at the very end.
in hindsight, i do think that the short version fits better on the flow of the cd, and it will remain there - minus the vocals. yet, i also think that this slowed down version deserves it's own document. i've slowed down two other versions of the track, as well, to drag out the fun. the album version closes this collection.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and then manipulated further in the summer of 2016. released on july 7, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0.
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits
j - guitars, effects, bass, synths, drum programming, vocals, digital wave manipulation, production
released january 22, 1998
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/useless
1) this is the original version slowed down to half speed. created on jan 21, 1998. converted to stereo on sept 24, 2014.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-2
2) originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. slowed down and run through a click reducer on july 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-from-2013-remaster
3) recorded in jan, 1998. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 2, 2015. slowed down july 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/use-value-is-somewhat-difficult-to-define-in-the-human-propensity-towards-artistic-expression-slowed-down
4) recorded in jan, 1998. reclaimed june 29, 2015. remixed july 2, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/use-value-is-somewhat-difficult-to-define-in-the-human-propensity-towards-artistic-expression-2
5) kind of a new wave / synth pop track. this is the first track with my new synth on it. that's a large part of what the track is. recorded in jan, 1998. sped-up on july 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-valium-sped-up-2
6) deleted 2013 remaster of 1998 demo cd. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/useless-2013-remaster-2
06-07-2016: j reacts to the inability of humans to understand complex space
tracks worked on in this vlog:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
--
i got to a point with physics where i just didn't believe what they were telling me. it took me some time to at least accept it as reasonable quantification for experimental use, but at the time i just flatly didn't believe the ideas. so, i faded back into math - and eventually hit the same crises.
if we need extra dimensions to model space properly, then we're stuck at an impossible impasse. we can only understand these extra dimensions as variables on a piece of paper. if the model is correct, we can never actually experience it. so, we're left with a proof that we can never understand space?
yet, we may be able to at least contemplate glimpses. consider a dog's sensory perception of the world around us. dog's rely dramatically on scent and sound, which are more wave-based methods of energy transfer. light is a particle and a wave. i get it. but it oscillates too fast for us to experience it as anything but a particle. that's why we have such a bias to straight-lines and euclidean geometry - not because it reflects the surface, but because it's a function of our biology. we capture light. light moves in straight lines. so, we construct the world rectilineally. it doesn't matter that we live in a sphere, if the sphere is reflected in a rectangle. if we were dogs and relied more on smell and sound, we'd get a richer sensory perception. the slower moving wave reveals a deeper sense of reality. so, we'd have a more developed concept of the density of space. we'd have evolved the ability to locate a smell in space, and navigate the contours around it's emission. is that not a complexity in the understanding of space?
apparently, humans retain the genes to be able to understand depth perception within magnetic fields. the radiation of odor particles may turn out to be less random than appears, instead traversing some path through complicated space. but, an educated human mind could get a better understanding of complex space by being able to directly interact with environmental magnetic fields. i think that some empirical concept of higher dimensional space would be plausible given this hypothetical genetic improvement, by carrying out experiments that have side effects that we can actually sense. yet, this would be a privileged experience - it may even break the species barrier.
still, it's a different way to think about how your dog experiences the world. it's not all straight lines and right angles. it's swirls and bunches and nooks and crannies in what must truly be some kind of ether.
"they operate on a different frequency."
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
--
i got to a point with physics where i just didn't believe what they were telling me. it took me some time to at least accept it as reasonable quantification for experimental use, but at the time i just flatly didn't believe the ideas. so, i faded back into math - and eventually hit the same crises.
if we need extra dimensions to model space properly, then we're stuck at an impossible impasse. we can only understand these extra dimensions as variables on a piece of paper. if the model is correct, we can never actually experience it. so, we're left with a proof that we can never understand space?
yet, we may be able to at least contemplate glimpses. consider a dog's sensory perception of the world around us. dog's rely dramatically on scent and sound, which are more wave-based methods of energy transfer. light is a particle and a wave. i get it. but it oscillates too fast for us to experience it as anything but a particle. that's why we have such a bias to straight-lines and euclidean geometry - not because it reflects the surface, but because it's a function of our biology. we capture light. light moves in straight lines. so, we construct the world rectilineally. it doesn't matter that we live in a sphere, if the sphere is reflected in a rectangle. if we were dogs and relied more on smell and sound, we'd get a richer sensory perception. the slower moving wave reveals a deeper sense of reality. so, we'd have a more developed concept of the density of space. we'd have evolved the ability to locate a smell in space, and navigate the contours around it's emission. is that not a complexity in the understanding of space?
apparently, humans retain the genes to be able to understand depth perception within magnetic fields. the radiation of odor particles may turn out to be less random than appears, instead traversing some path through complicated space. but, an educated human mind could get a better understanding of complex space by being able to directly interact with environmental magnetic fields. i think that some empirical concept of higher dimensional space would be plausible given this hypothetical genetic improvement, by carrying out experiments that have side effects that we can actually sense. yet, this would be a privileged experience - it may even break the species barrier.
still, it's a different way to think about how your dog experiences the world. it's not all straight lines and right angles. it's swirls and bunches and nooks and crannies in what must truly be some kind of ether.
"they operate on a different frequency."
finalizing skaters (inri005)
audio permanently closed for inri005.
i've presented this track in chronological ordering because i wanted to tell the story of the track itself. looking through my releases, it may be difficult to tell what is an ep from what is a single, and what is an ep from what is a record. this is an ep, and not a single. it's an ep because it's a conceptual ordering of the tracks, rather than just an exploration of a single incarnation of a specific track.
i don't deny that the lyrics are painful. and, wasn't i supposed to be getting rid of painful vocals? well, perhaps. but, note that no vocal takes of this track make it on to any of the abum-format presentations of it, excepting inricycled. the vocals are tied into the concept of the ep, which is a narration of the song as it developed.
so, chronological ordering is the only rational way to present the tracks. further, a comprehensive exploration of the track's development actually becomes necessary, in order to narrate it's entire development.
i'm not going to take this approach to every single. i just think that this track had to be preserved in this kind of way.
===
this is maybe a little hard to understand, if you weren't a teenager in a very specific period - about '91-'99, the 90s i guess, when the nu metal shift "corrected" things and tough guys went backing to being metalheads.
that period overlaps with a period when punk fashion moved from subculture to dominant culture. as with any other failed social revolution, the period is more defined by certain subculture traits being co-opted than it was by any meaningful change in social attitudes, even if it did correspond with a move towards liberalizing social attitudes in the older members of gen x.
i remember playing this for my aunt, who was a teenager in the 80s, and she was just confused by it. in her day, the skaters were the skinny punk kids that got picked on by the meathead jock metal heads. as mentioned, i think people that were teenagers in the 00s may more readily associate with this as well.
but the 90s were weird in this sense. skater culture in the 90s was defined by a sort of thuggish machismo gang mentality that overlapped more into gangster rap than punk rock. what you had where i grew up was a lot of upper middle class white kids skating because it was advertised to them as the "cool thing to do" and in the process co-opting this sort of survivalist 'hood mentality into a tool of oppression that they used to bully and intimidate the kids that, a decade before, would have identified as skateboarders. those kids may have maintained an interest in punk rock, but weren't generally accepted into the skater clique - which was essentially the "in group".
the culmination may seem a little surreal nowadays, if for no other reason than that it's been forgotten. but i remember sneaking through back alleys, evading skateboarding gangs made up of kids into slayer, while i had socal punk music blasting through my headphones. and i'm sure you'll get similar stories if you ask around - or maybe you were also that kid.
on one hand, this track was constructed to be sort of precious, and i think that it is. it's a pretty catchy pop song, really. on the other hand, i think i was trying to be a bit tougher than i actually was. i wasn't one to back down from confrontation - i'm still not. while i think it's true that i could have taken most of these brats one-on-one, i probably would have mostly chosen not to. see, the fear was always more that they'd convert the boards into weapons and then jump you. in canada, guns aren't much of a concern, but knives are.
...and the fear often came out of trivial reasons. talking with somebody's girlfriend. having a pair of headphones or a pair of shoes that might be worth something. basic thug shit.
in hindsight, the analysis here is a little simplistic. suggesting that these kids are going to grow up into pimps is problematic on numerous levels, although i can state with blunt honesty that a number of the people the song was about have grown up to be petty criminals with lengthy criminal records. i have to own that lack of depth and how it comes out in sometimes less than ideal statements, but i'm going to once again blame that on my age.
overall, i like this track on both a musical and thematic level. i just wish i had articulated myself a little bit better.
--
there was a specific story that influenced the track. when i was in the ninth grade, one of these skater bro types took it upon himself to start body-checking me into lockers. it was well understood that this person was older, but that just gave him more clout in the school's skater clique; he knew the older kids that they looked up to. i was never certain if he was on his second or third try at grade 9.
this wasn't the first time somebody had tried to get physical with me, but it was an escalation that i couldn't really tolerate. people flicking my ears was an annoyance, and especially so when it was a game, but it's the kind of thing one withstands. these were full on, run-at-me body checks that seemed to be designed with intent to harm.
i actually tried a few different tactics before i reacted. i tried sitting behind in class until he left, but it was visibly starting to make the female teacher uncomfortable that i was just sitting around waiting after class - and perhaps not unreasonably so. as for bringing it up with the teacher? well, this guy went out of his way to look for a teacher watching before he took a run. i couldn't be followed around by a teacher all day. i had to react on my own.
so, i tricked him into running at my open leg, which had him fall face first into the locker. he did not see the retribution in the act; he got up looking for a fight. as i was walking toward the exit, which was a staircase downwards, he took another run at me - which i dodged. that was an adrenaline filled movement, i tell you - he was full of stupid, hot rage and sidestepped like an angry bull. but, i still had to time it. there was no escape. he ended up falling down several flights of stairs and breaking his leg. consider what would have happened if i hadn't moved - even considering that i may have helped him lose his balance, a little.
from that point onwards, i lived in fear of being swarmed. rumours were floating around that i'd better stay away from certain people - which was a broadcast to me to stay low. i got the message, and spent the next several years sneaking around back passageways in and out of the school. i learned where the cuts in the fences were, how to detour across floor levels to follow the crowd, how to time the bus (we had public transit passes - and that fact alone probably spared me broken bones) to come in to class during the national anthem and other various scheduling and transiting tactics to avoid being alone at critical junctures. and, then i started to enjoy living that way, too.
i don't think that student came back the next year, so i'm not sure if he ever finished grade 9. but, part of the reason i'm telling you this story is that it helps paint a clearer demographic picture of the narrative that i'm presenting. if you remove the "skater" designation, this could be a story about gangs in schools that could be applied equally well across any other grouping. it just happened to be that the gangs at my school were populated by white skater kids, some from the welfare projects and others comfortably middle class. that might help to explain what some might see as a difficult reference point.
initially written in 1997. recreated in jan, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed july 1, 2015. deconstructed dec 18, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. finalized on july 6, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 1998, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, drum kit, sequencing, vocal noises, vocals, samples, production
released january 12, 1998
i've presented this track in chronological ordering because i wanted to tell the story of the track itself. looking through my releases, it may be difficult to tell what is an ep from what is a single, and what is an ep from what is a record. this is an ep, and not a single. it's an ep because it's a conceptual ordering of the tracks, rather than just an exploration of a single incarnation of a specific track.
i don't deny that the lyrics are painful. and, wasn't i supposed to be getting rid of painful vocals? well, perhaps. but, note that no vocal takes of this track make it on to any of the abum-format presentations of it, excepting inricycled. the vocals are tied into the concept of the ep, which is a narration of the song as it developed.
so, chronological ordering is the only rational way to present the tracks. further, a comprehensive exploration of the track's development actually becomes necessary, in order to narrate it's entire development.
i'm not going to take this approach to every single. i just think that this track had to be preserved in this kind of way.
===
this is maybe a little hard to understand, if you weren't a teenager in a very specific period - about '91-'99, the 90s i guess, when the nu metal shift "corrected" things and tough guys went backing to being metalheads.
that period overlaps with a period when punk fashion moved from subculture to dominant culture. as with any other failed social revolution, the period is more defined by certain subculture traits being co-opted than it was by any meaningful change in social attitudes, even if it did correspond with a move towards liberalizing social attitudes in the older members of gen x.
i remember playing this for my aunt, who was a teenager in the 80s, and she was just confused by it. in her day, the skaters were the skinny punk kids that got picked on by the meathead jock metal heads. as mentioned, i think people that were teenagers in the 00s may more readily associate with this as well.
but the 90s were weird in this sense. skater culture in the 90s was defined by a sort of thuggish machismo gang mentality that overlapped more into gangster rap than punk rock. what you had where i grew up was a lot of upper middle class white kids skating because it was advertised to them as the "cool thing to do" and in the process co-opting this sort of survivalist 'hood mentality into a tool of oppression that they used to bully and intimidate the kids that, a decade before, would have identified as skateboarders. those kids may have maintained an interest in punk rock, but weren't generally accepted into the skater clique - which was essentially the "in group".
the culmination may seem a little surreal nowadays, if for no other reason than that it's been forgotten. but i remember sneaking through back alleys, evading skateboarding gangs made up of kids into slayer, while i had socal punk music blasting through my headphones. and i'm sure you'll get similar stories if you ask around - or maybe you were also that kid.
on one hand, this track was constructed to be sort of precious, and i think that it is. it's a pretty catchy pop song, really. on the other hand, i think i was trying to be a bit tougher than i actually was. i wasn't one to back down from confrontation - i'm still not. while i think it's true that i could have taken most of these brats one-on-one, i probably would have mostly chosen not to. see, the fear was always more that they'd convert the boards into weapons and then jump you. in canada, guns aren't much of a concern, but knives are.
...and the fear often came out of trivial reasons. talking with somebody's girlfriend. having a pair of headphones or a pair of shoes that might be worth something. basic thug shit.
in hindsight, the analysis here is a little simplistic. suggesting that these kids are going to grow up into pimps is problematic on numerous levels, although i can state with blunt honesty that a number of the people the song was about have grown up to be petty criminals with lengthy criminal records. i have to own that lack of depth and how it comes out in sometimes less than ideal statements, but i'm going to once again blame that on my age.
overall, i like this track on both a musical and thematic level. i just wish i had articulated myself a little bit better.
--
there was a specific story that influenced the track. when i was in the ninth grade, one of these skater bro types took it upon himself to start body-checking me into lockers. it was well understood that this person was older, but that just gave him more clout in the school's skater clique; he knew the older kids that they looked up to. i was never certain if he was on his second or third try at grade 9.
this wasn't the first time somebody had tried to get physical with me, but it was an escalation that i couldn't really tolerate. people flicking my ears was an annoyance, and especially so when it was a game, but it's the kind of thing one withstands. these were full on, run-at-me body checks that seemed to be designed with intent to harm.
i actually tried a few different tactics before i reacted. i tried sitting behind in class until he left, but it was visibly starting to make the female teacher uncomfortable that i was just sitting around waiting after class - and perhaps not unreasonably so. as for bringing it up with the teacher? well, this guy went out of his way to look for a teacher watching before he took a run. i couldn't be followed around by a teacher all day. i had to react on my own.
so, i tricked him into running at my open leg, which had him fall face first into the locker. he did not see the retribution in the act; he got up looking for a fight. as i was walking toward the exit, which was a staircase downwards, he took another run at me - which i dodged. that was an adrenaline filled movement, i tell you - he was full of stupid, hot rage and sidestepped like an angry bull. but, i still had to time it. there was no escape. he ended up falling down several flights of stairs and breaking his leg. consider what would have happened if i hadn't moved - even considering that i may have helped him lose his balance, a little.
from that point onwards, i lived in fear of being swarmed. rumours were floating around that i'd better stay away from certain people - which was a broadcast to me to stay low. i got the message, and spent the next several years sneaking around back passageways in and out of the school. i learned where the cuts in the fences were, how to detour across floor levels to follow the crowd, how to time the bus (we had public transit passes - and that fact alone probably spared me broken bones) to come in to class during the national anthem and other various scheduling and transiting tactics to avoid being alone at critical junctures. and, then i started to enjoy living that way, too.
i don't think that student came back the next year, so i'm not sure if he ever finished grade 9. but, part of the reason i'm telling you this story is that it helps paint a clearer demographic picture of the narrative that i'm presenting. if you remove the "skater" designation, this could be a story about gangs in schools that could be applied equally well across any other grouping. it just happened to be that the gangs at my school were populated by white skater kids, some from the welfare projects and others comfortably middle class. that might help to explain what some might see as a difficult reference point.
initially written in 1997. recreated in jan, 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. reclaimed july 1, 2015. deconstructed dec 18, 2015. compiled on jan 4, 2016. finalized on july 6, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 1998, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, drum kit, sequencing, vocal noises, vocals, samples, production
released january 12, 1998
Wednesday, July 6, 2016
05-07-2016: closing inri003 & inri004 & inri005
tracks worked on in this vlog:
1) releases:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inricycled
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrisampled
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/fuck-the-dead
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/skaters
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/useless
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/confused-2
2) loose tracks:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/permission-3
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/slaves
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/cats-apocalypse
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/a-deleted-exercise-in-hipster-homophobia
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/swim
3) aleph disc:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
1) releases:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inricycled
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inrisampled
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/fuck-the-dead
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/skaters
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/useless
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/confused-2
2) loose tracks:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/permission-3
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/slaves
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/cats-apocalypse
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/a-deleted-exercise-in-hipster-homophobia
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/swim
3) aleph disc:
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/period-1
Tuesday, July 5, 2016
finalizing fuck the dead (inri004)
audio permanently closed for inri004.
i've created a new single release on my final administrative run through the material, and i want to defend the decision to do so. when i was creating the singles in january, this track didn't have any alternate cuts from the new session - i just had the remaster and a bunch of failed versions. there was no drum machine remix and no original demo. so, it wasn't fit for single treatment.
but, material for this track generated as i explored the different ways to present the record. i recreated the middle section for the record. then, i brought in limited vocals for the on sexual confusion in adolescence mini-epic. so, now i do have a couple of alternate versions, and it does make sense to release a single.
i should stress that the single is the vocal cut, which does not make it's way on to any of the album-type configurations.
===
i've created a new single release on my final administrative run through the material, and i want to defend the decision to do so. when i was creating the singles in january, this track didn't have any alternate cuts from the new session - i just had the remaster and a bunch of failed versions. there was no drum machine remix and no original demo. so, it wasn't fit for single treatment.
but, material for this track generated as i explored the different ways to present the record. i recreated the middle section for the record. then, i brought in limited vocals for the on sexual confusion in adolescence mini-epic. so, now i do have a couple of alternate versions, and it does make sense to release a single.
i should stress that the single is the vocal cut, which does not make it's way on to any of the album-type configurations.
===
"wait - do you, like, fuck the dead, or something?"
i wasn't the target; i was merely an observer. but, i kind of lived it, too. so, i had to suggest a proper response.
see, i think the absurdity of the response follows from the absurdity of the question, and the proper way to react is to acknowledge the absurdity of the exchange by playing along. my proposal would be to take the topic to it's most absurd logical conclusion by engaging in a logical defense of the absurd accusation, and then annoying that person by bringing it up all of the time. if i saw him walking in the halls, i'd run up to him and loudly tell him that i've got a great argument for necrophilia if he wants to hear it....
now, i wasn't the person being taunted. so, i never got to act on those impulses. nor was the person that was being taunted nearly as indifferent to social conventions as i was. so, my suggestions were never interpreted seriously - despite their sincerity. i think i should acknowledge that i didn't properly understand what this person wanted. see, if it were me, my goal would be to have this person never ever look at me ever again. i would react by providing a set of disincentives to bother me. the more infamous, the more effective. but, i just wanted for them to leave me the fuck alone. this person wanted some kind of "acceptance", so those kinds of belligerent actions were counter-productive in seeking a final resolution.
so, the song is imagining how i would react if i were to be taunted in such a way.
i've created a new single release on my final administrative run through the material, and i want to defend the decision to do so. when i was creating the singles in january, this track didn't have any alternate cuts from the new session - i just had the remaster and a bunch of failed versions. there was no drum machine remix and no original demo. so, it wasn't fit for single treatment.
but, material for this track generated as i explored the different ways to present the record. i recreated the middle section for the record. then, i brought in limited vocals for the on sexual confusion in adolescence mini-epic. so, now i do have a couple of alternate versions, and it does make sense to release a single.
this is not the very first track that i recorded with my new four-track in 1998, but it's the first cut that made the record. something that got lost in the multiple transfers of the file was that the track was built up around a lot of guitar effects and was meant to have a swirling, shoegaze-y kind of feel. i then cut that recording up and inserted a short collage of computer generated sound, followed by a short jam of me playing guitar over a sample of the spiderman theme song - the original one, from 1967. the recorded track then clicks in and concludes itself in some more layered guitar harmonies. i draw attention to this because it is the juxtaposition of folk-y guitars with oppressive, synthesized percussion that forms the basis of interest in this, musically. it's structurally a blues guitar piece, it's just been ported substantially through technology.
originally created in late 1997 and early 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. released on july 4, 2016. finalized on july 5, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
the album version of this track appears on my first record, inri (inri015):
i wasn't the target; i was merely an observer. but, i kind of lived it, too. so, i had to suggest a proper response.
see, i think the absurdity of the response follows from the absurdity of the question, and the proper way to react is to acknowledge the absurdity of the exchange by playing along. my proposal would be to take the topic to it's most absurd logical conclusion by engaging in a logical defense of the absurd accusation, and then annoying that person by bringing it up all of the time. if i saw him walking in the halls, i'd run up to him and loudly tell him that i've got a great argument for necrophilia if he wants to hear it....
now, i wasn't the person being taunted. so, i never got to act on those impulses. nor was the person that was being taunted nearly as indifferent to social conventions as i was. so, my suggestions were never interpreted seriously - despite their sincerity. i think i should acknowledge that i didn't properly understand what this person wanted. see, if it were me, my goal would be to have this person never ever look at me ever again. i would react by providing a set of disincentives to bother me. the more infamous, the more effective. but, i just wanted for them to leave me the fuck alone. this person wanted some kind of "acceptance", so those kinds of belligerent actions were counter-productive in seeking a final resolution.
so, the song is imagining how i would react if i were to be taunted in such a way.
i've created a new single release on my final administrative run through the material, and i want to defend the decision to do so. when i was creating the singles in january, this track didn't have any alternate cuts from the new session - i just had the remaster and a bunch of failed versions. there was no drum machine remix and no original demo. so, it wasn't fit for single treatment.
but, material for this track generated as i explored the different ways to present the record. i recreated the middle section for the record. then, i brought in limited vocals for the on sexual confusion in adolescence mini-epic. so, now i do have a couple of alternate versions, and it does make sense to release a single.
this is not the very first track that i recorded with my new four-track in 1998, but it's the first cut that made the record. something that got lost in the multiple transfers of the file was that the track was built up around a lot of guitar effects and was meant to have a swirling, shoegaze-y kind of feel. i then cut that recording up and inserted a short collage of computer generated sound, followed by a short jam of me playing guitar over a sample of the spiderman theme song - the original one, from 1967. the recorded track then clicks in and concludes itself in some more layered guitar harmonies. i draw attention to this because it is the juxtaposition of folk-y guitars with oppressive, synthesized percussion that forms the basis of interest in this, musically. it's structurally a blues guitar piece, it's just been ported substantially through technology.
originally created in late 1997 and early 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. released on july 4, 2016. finalized on july 5, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
the album version of this track appears on my first record, inri (inri015):
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/inri-3
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1998, 2013, 2015, 2016).
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1998, 2013, 2015, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, vocals, samples, digital wave manipulation, cool edit synthesis, production
released january 9, 1998
released january 9, 1998
j reacts to no indictment in the clinton email inquiry
so, everybody said that it was obvious that charges couldn't be filed, and in the end no charges were filed. but, that still doesn't answer the question as to who was orchestrating the take down, or whether they're continuing with it. like, ok - maybe she sent a former president to have a talk with the sitting attorney general, and then the charges magically dissipate. which is, wow. but, why did it get to the point where she had to send a former president to track down a sitting attorney-general on the fucking carmac of a plane in arizona? that suggests a pretty serious internal power struggle was happening. see, my proposal is that this internal power struggle is substantial. i'd like to see what happens next before i react further.
finalizing inrisampled (inri003)
that was a nice clean listen. but as far as i can tell, it's just luck. i'm going to let things stabilize in here further before i start bringing in any more gear, as i don't fully understand the fluctuations, yet. i hope my luck lasts indefinitely, but then it wouldn't be luck - something would have changed. i saw the crews coming to put in led lights on the street, and i'd think that should turn the volume down a little, anyways. but, i'm not jumping to conclusions. right now, it's just luck.
i'm going to close inri003.
this is a collection of sound experiments from 1997 that i split off into a self-contained ep in the fall of 2013. the initial idea was for it to comprehensively fill the time gap over the fall of 1997, which meant including some of the drum machine tracks that i was programming at the time, but i quickly split that idea off into a different project, leaving a kind of skeleton of sound art experiments. i then found myself listening to a playlist of those tracks on repeat, as i was trying to figure out how to organize them. the most obvious choice became apparent.
there is actually a thematic continuity across these tracks, as they were all constructed entirely out of samples of existing sound that were layered over top of each other after being looped, time-manipulated, distorted and whatever else. so, the projects split cleanly. as a self-contained unit of sound, this is certainly about as weird a piece of music that you could imagine, which just made it that much more appealing to listen to. as the tracks are all short, they come off more as sections of a longer piece when run directly into each other, despite being nowhere related.
so, the main purpose of this release remains autobiographical, but i'll stand by it as a compelling piece of music, nonetheless.
==
i spent the summer and fall of 1997 programming drum tracks into an ry30, notating them into a tablature program and sequencing them using noteworthy composer. i did not know how i was going to record these tracks. i think i was expecting to use the computer, but that was probably naive; instead, i was gifted a 4-track recording machine. i then spent the next year and a half rearranging and rerecording the songs i programmed over that period. as these tracks were recorded into my pc, they are time stamped...so i have a much clearer understanding of when they were finished.
the jump to incorporating computers into the recording process is something i always wanted to do, it's just that it wasn't really previously feasible. first, there was a learning curve. i was a smart kid, though; the learning curve was just a time concern. the larger problem was simply access to a pc. i did have a pc at my disposal, but it did not have a modem and it was only equipped to run windows 3.1, which basically meant i could run civ 2 and wolfenstein and little else. the windows 95 computer had dial up but it was in a central location for family use.
when we moved across the city, my dad bought a new computer and i happily inherited his old one. this gave me internet access, which allowed me to download some freeware. it also gave me the time i needed to learn how to do certain things.
i'm separating out a handful of my first electronic sound experiments and collecting them together into an ep. what these blasts of noise have in common is that they were constructed on a windows 95 computer out of samples or generated sound and with very primitive software while i was waiting to get some kind of recording equipment. most of it was pasted together meticulously using the windows 95 sound recorder; the rest of it was constructed in cool edit, which i used as a sort of a synthesizer.
for the most part, these weren't really ever meant to be songs. i ended up using them as connectors, introductions, background. "continuity". yet, i find the idea of throwing them together here to be interesting from an autobiographical perspective.
created in mid 1997. sequenced and converted to stereo in november, 2013. released on nov 9, 2013. corrected in september, 2014. finalized on july 5, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - cool edit (wave synthesis, digital wave editing), windows 95 sound recorder (sampling, digital wave editing), yamaha ry30 drum machine (programming)
released december 1, 1997
i'm going to close inri003.
this is a collection of sound experiments from 1997 that i split off into a self-contained ep in the fall of 2013. the initial idea was for it to comprehensively fill the time gap over the fall of 1997, which meant including some of the drum machine tracks that i was programming at the time, but i quickly split that idea off into a different project, leaving a kind of skeleton of sound art experiments. i then found myself listening to a playlist of those tracks on repeat, as i was trying to figure out how to organize them. the most obvious choice became apparent.
there is actually a thematic continuity across these tracks, as they were all constructed entirely out of samples of existing sound that were layered over top of each other after being looped, time-manipulated, distorted and whatever else. so, the projects split cleanly. as a self-contained unit of sound, this is certainly about as weird a piece of music that you could imagine, which just made it that much more appealing to listen to. as the tracks are all short, they come off more as sections of a longer piece when run directly into each other, despite being nowhere related.
so, the main purpose of this release remains autobiographical, but i'll stand by it as a compelling piece of music, nonetheless.
==
i spent the summer and fall of 1997 programming drum tracks into an ry30, notating them into a tablature program and sequencing them using noteworthy composer. i did not know how i was going to record these tracks. i think i was expecting to use the computer, but that was probably naive; instead, i was gifted a 4-track recording machine. i then spent the next year and a half rearranging and rerecording the songs i programmed over that period. as these tracks were recorded into my pc, they are time stamped...so i have a much clearer understanding of when they were finished.
the jump to incorporating computers into the recording process is something i always wanted to do, it's just that it wasn't really previously feasible. first, there was a learning curve. i was a smart kid, though; the learning curve was just a time concern. the larger problem was simply access to a pc. i did have a pc at my disposal, but it did not have a modem and it was only equipped to run windows 3.1, which basically meant i could run civ 2 and wolfenstein and little else. the windows 95 computer had dial up but it was in a central location for family use.
when we moved across the city, my dad bought a new computer and i happily inherited his old one. this gave me internet access, which allowed me to download some freeware. it also gave me the time i needed to learn how to do certain things.
i'm separating out a handful of my first electronic sound experiments and collecting them together into an ep. what these blasts of noise have in common is that they were constructed on a windows 95 computer out of samples or generated sound and with very primitive software while i was waiting to get some kind of recording equipment. most of it was pasted together meticulously using the windows 95 sound recorder; the rest of it was constructed in cool edit, which i used as a sort of a synthesizer.
for the most part, these weren't really ever meant to be songs. i ended up using them as connectors, introductions, background. "continuity". yet, i find the idea of throwing them together here to be interesting from an autobiographical perspective.
created in mid 1997. sequenced and converted to stereo in november, 2013. released on nov 9, 2013. corrected in september, 2014. finalized on july 5, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - cool edit (wave synthesis, digital wave editing), windows 95 sound recorder (sampling, digital wave editing), yamaha ry30 drum machine (programming)
released december 1, 1997
j reacts to wikileaks' prosecution of clinton as a red flag for deep state orchestration
this is so interesting to analyze from so many different perspectives. so, if they release the emails through wikileaks, does that reduce it to a conspiracy theory? on the other hand, if the emails are actually used to prosecute - which so many claim is impossible - then is this itself a part of the show trial, or is it actually just reduced to an act of personal revenge?
see, i'm normally all about evidence, but i have to leave space open for the value of speculation. we have such a deficit of evidence. i mean, if empiricism is supposed to be about the idea that you can better understand the world around you by measuring it than by imagining it, that presupposes an ability to measure things. there's no contradiction in upholding evidence when it is available, and retreating to the imagination when it is not. when, specifically? what's the test? when the other option is "there's no evidence". then, we're stuck with inferences and guesses.
i'm just not quite sure why the administration would let this drag on as long as it has if it always intended to stifle it. that doesn't necessarily mean the administration is sabotaging the run; it could also mean that the administration has less control over state machinations than might be commonly imagined. if the democratic party had control over this, it would have been shut down already.
so, i'm inclined to push back against the idea that this can't happen. this is happening. who's orchestrating it?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/wikileaks-publishes-more-than-1000-hillary-clinton-war-emails-a7120011.html
see, i'm normally all about evidence, but i have to leave space open for the value of speculation. we have such a deficit of evidence. i mean, if empiricism is supposed to be about the idea that you can better understand the world around you by measuring it than by imagining it, that presupposes an ability to measure things. there's no contradiction in upholding evidence when it is available, and retreating to the imagination when it is not. when, specifically? what's the test? when the other option is "there's no evidence". then, we're stuck with inferences and guesses.
i'm just not quite sure why the administration would let this drag on as long as it has if it always intended to stifle it. that doesn't necessarily mean the administration is sabotaging the run; it could also mean that the administration has less control over state machinations than might be commonly imagined. if the democratic party had control over this, it would have been shut down already.
so, i'm inclined to push back against the idea that this can't happen. this is happening. who's orchestrating it?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/wikileaks-publishes-more-than-1000-hillary-clinton-war-emails-a7120011.html
j reacts to the contrived nature of the media reaction to the star of david fiasco
i have to admit that i have a hard time fathoming the idea that the staffers working trump's twitter feed had any intent to tweet a star of david out of some kind of...what's the benefit, again? see, if i thought that donald trump was a white supremacist, i'd think that the last thing he'd want to do is advertise it like that. there's plenty of white supremacism around us. it doesn't come out in archaic references to historical conspiracies. it comes out in the kind of legislation that was passed in the last clinton presidency. white supremacy is the establishment order; it's not some cartoon slogan.
so, i have a hard time taking the fiasco seriously. but, i think that the traction the story is getting says something about the media, and then something about the way that we consume the media. what is inconceivably anything besides an unfortunate error, however unfortunate, is being interpreted as some kind of solidarity with something that doesn't exist - and people are scooping it up.
if nothing else, bernie sanders injected a sense of reality into the election. he wanted to talk about real issues. the juxtaposition into the issueless nature of the upcoming general is going to be painful for a lot of people.
so, i have a hard time taking the fiasco seriously. but, i think that the traction the story is getting says something about the media, and then something about the way that we consume the media. what is inconceivably anything besides an unfortunate error, however unfortunate, is being interpreted as some kind of solidarity with something that doesn't exist - and people are scooping it up.
if nothing else, bernie sanders injected a sense of reality into the election. he wanted to talk about real issues. the juxtaposition into the issueless nature of the upcoming general is going to be painful for a lot of people.
Monday, July 4, 2016
is there a worthwhile engagement with the citizen proponents of brexit?
well, it's perhaps interesting to consider the uk's immigration policies in reflection of this passage by engels. i've posted this previously on anti-immigration videos coming out of europe. i think it's strongly worth contemplating.
--
these are my notes to the 1892 introduction of socialism: scientific and utopian. the introduction is sometimes split into it's own text, and given the title of on historical materialsm.
===
this cursory delve into the mainstream philosophical questions of the day aside, the text is actually primarily a brief history lesson. it places the three major battles of the bourgeoisie against the aristocracy within the context of the english and continental approaches to religion. central to marxist history is, of course, the idea of class struggle, particularly between three classes: the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. also keep in mind that the purpose of religion within a marxist framework is, of course, to control the population....
the first battle between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie was the reformation. marx keys in on two of the many reformers, luther and calvin, in order to contrast what happened in england with what happened in germany. in germany, the aristocracy won handily; lutheranism became, like roman christianity, a deeply feudal religion. calvin, on the other hand, produced republican movements in holland, scotland and england, the latter of which led to the second struggle, the "glorious revolution". this "glorious" revolution, however, was somewhat of a failure; the english aristocracy had actually defeated the upstart bourgeoisie, placed it back under its own subservience and left it in philosophical ignorance. enlightened philosophies such as materialism continued to be hoarded by the aristocracy; the bourgeoisie languished in the ignorance of christianity. on the continent, however, materialism flourished and with it came the third battle, the french revolution. according to engels, the french revolution was the first time that the bourgeoisie successfully usurped power from the aristocracy (for a brief time).
while the french revolution was occurring in france, the industrial revolution was occurring in england. by definition, the primary beneficiaries of the industrial revolution would be the english bourgeoisie, who finally saw their power eclipse the aristocracy - through peaceful, financial means and not through violent class struggle. the bourgeoisie then used that newfound financial power to gain political power by passing bills through parliament, such as the reform act. in other words, they legislated themselves into power; however, they were never able to push the aristocracy out of power. a second conclusion of the industrial revolution was the creation of a new class, the proletariat, which began for the first time to organize politically through the creation of new parties, such as the chartists in england. all of that led to the first uprisings of the proletariat, in 1848, which were crushed not by the bourgeoisie but by the aristocracy. interestingly, engels notes that the british aristocracy responded to these uprisings by increasing funding for religious proselytization across the country side.
the years after 1848 saw increasing unrest amongst the proletariat throughout europe, especially in germany. again, engels points out that the bourgeoisie and aristocracy came to the common conclusion that, in order to prevent the "destruction of society", the working class must be evangelized. in england, no such approach was necessary because the british aristocracy had already spent lavishly on maintaining a religious proletariat and bourgeoisie; engels comes to his key statement of the essay while discussing this,
They had come to grief with materialism. "Die Religionmuss dem Volk erhalten werden" — religion must be kept alive for the people — that was the only and the last means to save society from utter ruin. Unfortunately for themselves, they did not find this out until they had done their level best to break up religion for ever. And now it was the turn of the British bourgeoisie to sneer and to say: "Why, you fools, I could have told you that 200 years ago!"
engels ends the essay by deducing that germany, not england, will be the scene of the first proletarian revolution.
well, it's perhaps interesting to consider the uk's immigration policies in reflection of this passage by engels. i've posted this previously on anti-immigration videos coming out of europe. i think it's strongly worth contemplating.
--
these are my notes to the 1892 introduction of socialism: scientific and utopian. the introduction is sometimes split into it's own text, and given the title of on historical materialsm.
===
this cursory delve into the mainstream philosophical questions of the day aside, the text is actually primarily a brief history lesson. it places the three major battles of the bourgeoisie against the aristocracy within the context of the english and continental approaches to religion. central to marxist history is, of course, the idea of class struggle, particularly between three classes: the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. also keep in mind that the purpose of religion within a marxist framework is, of course, to control the population....
the first battle between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie was the reformation. marx keys in on two of the many reformers, luther and calvin, in order to contrast what happened in england with what happened in germany. in germany, the aristocracy won handily; lutheranism became, like roman christianity, a deeply feudal religion. calvin, on the other hand, produced republican movements in holland, scotland and england, the latter of which led to the second struggle, the "glorious revolution". this "glorious" revolution, however, was somewhat of a failure; the english aristocracy had actually defeated the upstart bourgeoisie, placed it back under its own subservience and left it in philosophical ignorance. enlightened philosophies such as materialism continued to be hoarded by the aristocracy; the bourgeoisie languished in the ignorance of christianity. on the continent, however, materialism flourished and with it came the third battle, the french revolution. according to engels, the french revolution was the first time that the bourgeoisie successfully usurped power from the aristocracy (for a brief time).
while the french revolution was occurring in france, the industrial revolution was occurring in england. by definition, the primary beneficiaries of the industrial revolution would be the english bourgeoisie, who finally saw their power eclipse the aristocracy - through peaceful, financial means and not through violent class struggle. the bourgeoisie then used that newfound financial power to gain political power by passing bills through parliament, such as the reform act. in other words, they legislated themselves into power; however, they were never able to push the aristocracy out of power. a second conclusion of the industrial revolution was the creation of a new class, the proletariat, which began for the first time to organize politically through the creation of new parties, such as the chartists in england. all of that led to the first uprisings of the proletariat, in 1848, which were crushed not by the bourgeoisie but by the aristocracy. interestingly, engels notes that the british aristocracy responded to these uprisings by increasing funding for religious proselytization across the country side.
the years after 1848 saw increasing unrest amongst the proletariat throughout europe, especially in germany. again, engels points out that the bourgeoisie and aristocracy came to the common conclusion that, in order to prevent the "destruction of society", the working class must be evangelized. in england, no such approach was necessary because the british aristocracy had already spent lavishly on maintaining a religious proletariat and bourgeoisie; engels comes to his key statement of the essay while discussing this,
They had come to grief with materialism. "Die Religionmuss dem Volk erhalten werden" — religion must be kept alive for the people — that was the only and the last means to save society from utter ruin. Unfortunately for themselves, they did not find this out until they had done their level best to break up religion for ever. And now it was the turn of the British bourgeoisie to sneer and to say: "Why, you fools, I could have told you that 200 years ago!"
engels ends the essay by deducing that germany, not england, will be the scene of the first proletarian revolution.
publishing fuck the dead (inri004)
inri004.
===
"wait - do you, like, fuck the dead, or something?"
i wasn't the target; i was merely an observer. but, i kind of lived it, too. so, i had to suggest a proper response.
see, i think the absurdity of the response follows from the absurdity of the question, and the proper way to react is to acknowledge the absurdity of the exchange by playing along. my proposal would be to take the topic to it's most absurd logical conclusion by engaging in a logical defense of the absurd accusation, and then annoying that person by bringing it up all of the time. if i saw him walking in the halls, i'd run up to him and loudly tell him that i've got a great argument for necrophilia if he wants to hear it....
now, i wasn't the person being taunted. so, i never got to act on those impulses. nor was the person that was being taunted nearly as indifferent to social conventions as i was. so, my suggestions were never interpreted seriously - despite their sincerity. i think i should acknowledge that i didn't properly understand what this person wanted. see, if it were me, my goal would be to have this person never ever look at me ever again. i would react by providing a set of disincentives to bother me. the more infamous, the more effective. but, i just wanted for them to leave me the fuck alone. this person wanted some kind of "acceptance", so those kinds of belligerent actions were counter-productive in seeking a final resolution.
so, the song is imagining how i would react if i were to be taunted in such a way.
this is not the very first track that i recorded with my new four-track in 1998, but it's the first cut that made the record. something that got lost in the multiple transfers of the file was that the track was built up around a lot of guitar effects and was meant to have a swirling, shoegaze-y kind of feel. i then cut that recording up and inserted a short collage of computer generated sound, followed by a short jam of me playing guitar over a sample of the spiderman theme song - the original one, from 1967. the recorded track then clicks in and concludes itself in some more layered guitar harmonies. i draw attention to this because it is the juxtaposition of folk-y guitars with oppressive, synthesized percussion that forms the basis of interest in this, musically. it's structurally a blues guitar piece, it's just been ported substantially through technology.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. released on july 4, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0, which also includes all of the deleted versions of the track:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, vocals, samples, digital wave manipulation, cool edit synthesis, production
released january 9, 1998
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/fuck-the-dead
1) this is one of the tracks that had lyrics that i didn't want to give up entirely, because the obvious absurdity of them takes the track to a different level. it was more that i wanted to clean the vocals up - remove some sections that weren't as well thought out to just let the insolence shimmer. plus, i wanted to get rid of those damned samples. but, i felt the core of the vocal track actually pulled the song along, if presented in the right context. i eventually decided that the right context was to separate out the introductory six track mini-epic and incorporate vocals from the three constituent tracks: i did your mom, fuck the dead and confused. confused would actually be a full vocal take, whereas the vocals for the other two were spliced up strategically. that left me with a standalone vocal single for this track, as well as a few outtakes. i'm taking advantage of that to release this track as a single. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. track dated jan 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-3
2) this is the version that i was able to salvage from the source tapes. it does not include the breakdown in the middle, as that was not present in the source tapes. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015. track dated july 5, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-instrumental-edit
3) when i decided to redo the record, i had to reintegrate the breakdown, which was sourced from less reliable materials. this is an unsequenced take of that - a relic of the recording process. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. track dated jan 3, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-instrumental-mix
4) this version is taken directly from the record and consequently includes bleed from the preceding and subsequent tracks. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. track dated jan 8, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-final-album-version
5) deleted 2013 remaster. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. track dated dec 21, 2013.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-2013-remaster-2
6) deleted 1998 original, unsequenced mix from a 112 kbps mp3. originally created in 1998. track dated jan 9, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-1998-archive-2
===
"wait - do you, like, fuck the dead, or something?"
i wasn't the target; i was merely an observer. but, i kind of lived it, too. so, i had to suggest a proper response.
see, i think the absurdity of the response follows from the absurdity of the question, and the proper way to react is to acknowledge the absurdity of the exchange by playing along. my proposal would be to take the topic to it's most absurd logical conclusion by engaging in a logical defense of the absurd accusation, and then annoying that person by bringing it up all of the time. if i saw him walking in the halls, i'd run up to him and loudly tell him that i've got a great argument for necrophilia if he wants to hear it....
now, i wasn't the person being taunted. so, i never got to act on those impulses. nor was the person that was being taunted nearly as indifferent to social conventions as i was. so, my suggestions were never interpreted seriously - despite their sincerity. i think i should acknowledge that i didn't properly understand what this person wanted. see, if it were me, my goal would be to have this person never ever look at me ever again. i would react by providing a set of disincentives to bother me. the more infamous, the more effective. but, i just wanted for them to leave me the fuck alone. this person wanted some kind of "acceptance", so those kinds of belligerent actions were counter-productive in seeking a final resolution.
so, the song is imagining how i would react if i were to be taunted in such a way.
this is not the very first track that i recorded with my new four-track in 1998, but it's the first cut that made the record. something that got lost in the multiple transfers of the file was that the track was built up around a lot of guitar effects and was meant to have a swirling, shoegaze-y kind of feel. i then cut that recording up and inserted a short collage of computer generated sound, followed by a short jam of me playing guitar over a sample of the spiderman theme song - the original one, from 1967. the recorded track then clicks in and concludes itself in some more layered guitar harmonies. i draw attention to this because it is the juxtaposition of folk-y guitars with oppressive, synthesized percussion that forms the basis of interest in this, musically. it's structurally a blues guitar piece, it's just been ported substantially through technology.
originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. released on july 4, 2016. as always, please use headphones.
this release is compiled on inriℵ0, which also includes all of the deleted versions of the track:
jasonparent.bandcamp.com/merch/inri-box-set
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, drum programming, vocals, samples, digital wave manipulation, cool edit synthesis, production
released january 9, 1998
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/album/fuck-the-dead
1) this is one of the tracks that had lyrics that i didn't want to give up entirely, because the obvious absurdity of them takes the track to a different level. it was more that i wanted to clean the vocals up - remove some sections that weren't as well thought out to just let the insolence shimmer. plus, i wanted to get rid of those damned samples. but, i felt the core of the vocal track actually pulled the song along, if presented in the right context. i eventually decided that the right context was to separate out the introductory six track mini-epic and incorporate vocals from the three constituent tracks: i did your mom, fuck the dead and confused. confused would actually be a full vocal take, whereas the vocals for the other two were spliced up strategically. that left me with a standalone vocal single for this track, as well as a few outtakes. i'm taking advantage of that to release this track as a single. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. track dated jan 7, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-3
2) this is the version that i was able to salvage from the source tapes. it does not include the breakdown in the middle, as that was not present in the source tapes. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015. track dated july 5, 2015.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-instrumental-edit
3) when i decided to redo the record, i had to reintegrate the breakdown, which was sourced from less reliable materials. this is an unsequenced take of that - a relic of the recording process. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. track dated jan 3, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-instrumental-mix
4) this version is taken directly from the record and consequently includes bleed from the preceding and subsequent tracks. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. finally reconstructed in the summer of 2015 and extrapolated upon over the first half of 2016. track dated jan 8, 2016.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-final-album-version
5) deleted 2013 remaster. originally created in 1998. a failed rescue was attempted in 2013. track dated dec 21, 2013.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-2013-remaster-2
6) deleted 1998 original, unsequenced mix from a 112 kbps mp3. originally created in 1998. track dated jan 9, 1998.
https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/fuck-the-dead-1998-archive-2
Sunday, July 3, 2016
finalizing inricycled (inri002)
this was posted to google+ the other day and is how i'm going to close the disc here.
this is inri002; it's what i've been listening to in the other room for the last day or so. what it does is combine bits and pieces of my first two demos, which are largely unlistenable, into something that can actually be enjoyed. i've pointed out that the first demo has a kind of abstract quality to it that has the potential to find an extreme niche audience somewhere between philosophy of the world and trout mask replica. that's great and all, but most people find that kind of thing too challenging.
this is far more digestible - which also means far less cringe-y. there are some short vocal sections, but it's broadly instrumental. the sections are usually short. so, it's a mix tape. all of the snippets were recorded in 1996 or 1997, but the mix was constructed in 2013.
i'm posting this now because i'm enjoying it for what it is. i've come to the conclusion that this is a really seriously worthwhile addition to my discography. when i first mixed it, it was more as a way to save face - i wanted to be able to do something with all these little pieces of sound that were ruined by bad lyrics. it's grown on me as a really positive decision.
it's weird. very weird. that's why i like it so much. but, it's contained and sort of catchy, too. there's an audience for this, for sure. and i'm proud of this now, finally.
==
i've released a dozen different things with the title "inricycled", making it more of a concept than a release. it's not just the material i'm recycling, now, it's the idea of recycling material.
i hope this is the final iteration. the difference, here, is that i'm trying to isolate segments of songs that people interested in my more recent compositions would find interesting. these fragments aren't entirely void of lyrics, but they're very minimal. they're also quite short.
i've retitled most of the tracks to get a feel of what the music sounds like and/or what i was thinking as i was writing it.
the material in this volume is taken from the first two cassette demos, inri000 and inri001.
this is the best possible absolute starting point for my musical material.
written and recorded over 1996 and 1997. digitally remastered, sequenced and mildly modified in the fall of 2013. released dec 11, 2013. finalized as lp000 on july 3, 2016. i consider this my unofficial zeroth record. as always, please use headphones.
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
this is inri002; it's what i've been listening to in the other room for the last day or so. what it does is combine bits and pieces of my first two demos, which are largely unlistenable, into something that can actually be enjoyed. i've pointed out that the first demo has a kind of abstract quality to it that has the potential to find an extreme niche audience somewhere between philosophy of the world and trout mask replica. that's great and all, but most people find that kind of thing too challenging.
this is far more digestible - which also means far less cringe-y. there are some short vocal sections, but it's broadly instrumental. the sections are usually short. so, it's a mix tape. all of the snippets were recorded in 1996 or 1997, but the mix was constructed in 2013.
i'm posting this now because i'm enjoying it for what it is. i've come to the conclusion that this is a really seriously worthwhile addition to my discography. when i first mixed it, it was more as a way to save face - i wanted to be able to do something with all these little pieces of sound that were ruined by bad lyrics. it's grown on me as a really positive decision.
it's weird. very weird. that's why i like it so much. but, it's contained and sort of catchy, too. there's an audience for this, for sure. and i'm proud of this now, finally.
==
i've released a dozen different things with the title "inricycled", making it more of a concept than a release. it's not just the material i'm recycling, now, it's the idea of recycling material.
i hope this is the final iteration. the difference, here, is that i'm trying to isolate segments of songs that people interested in my more recent compositions would find interesting. these fragments aren't entirely void of lyrics, but they're very minimal. they're also quite short.
i've retitled most of the tracks to get a feel of what the music sounds like and/or what i was thinking as i was writing it.
the material in this volume is taken from the first two cassette demos, inri000 and inri001.
this is the best possible absolute starting point for my musical material.
written and recorded over 1996 and 1997. digitally remastered, sequenced and mildly modified in the fall of 2013. released dec 11, 2013. finalized as lp000 on july 3, 2016. i consider this my unofficial zeroth record. as always, please use headphones.
this release also includes a printable jewel case insert and will also eventually include a comprehensive package of journal entries from all phases of production (1997, 2013, 2016).
credits:
j - guitars, effects, bass, drums, vocals, keyboards, tapes, found sounds, metronomes, digital wave editing, production.
released july 1, 1997
i could take one cat. i could maybe take two cats. three, and i maybe vulnerable to an organized ambush. four? five? i'm actually not liking my chances.
cats have sharp, pointy claws and sharper, pointier teeth. they are extremely agile. they can do some damage, if they swarm you in a pack.
i have a colony of cats in my neighbourhood, and they're frequently freaking me out. it's not any one cat that bothers me, it's the fact that there are always several cats together. have you seen lions hunt? there's quite a bit of co-ordination. they seem to have some concept of geometry, even - it's really fascinating. it indicates some underevaluated intelligence.
i'm not suggesting house cats are as smart as lions, but how much similar ancestral programming is there in there? i don't really want to find out, if it means getting swarmed by five cats.
Saphire Blue
Cats are warm and loving animals so they need the company of other cats, case closed.
jessica
cats are obligate carnivores, actually.
cats have sharp, pointy claws and sharper, pointier teeth. they are extremely agile. they can do some damage, if they swarm you in a pack.
i have a colony of cats in my neighbourhood, and they're frequently freaking me out. it's not any one cat that bothers me, it's the fact that there are always several cats together. have you seen lions hunt? there's quite a bit of co-ordination. they seem to have some concept of geometry, even - it's really fascinating. it indicates some underevaluated intelligence.
i'm not suggesting house cats are as smart as lions, but how much similar ancestral programming is there in there? i don't really want to find out, if it means getting swarmed by five cats.
Saphire Blue
Cats are warm and loving animals so they need the company of other cats, case closed.
jessica
cats are obligate carnivores, actually.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)