Submit an Article | Bookmarked Articles
Viewing Articles About All - Page 27
| Talkin' bout my generation | July 12, 2006, 12:36PM |
 by: colorofnightfall |
|
How often has someone, a teacher or a parent perhaps, said to you 'in my day this would have never happened!' or 'kids these days are just no good!'? People from previous generations are constantly talking about how horrible the next is. How unbearable and unfruitful the children of this generation are. They blame the technology, the television, the economy and the government but never considered the problem with our generation is them. The problems with every generation are imagined by the previous generations. People tell me how sorry they are that I am young at this time. That gas is more expensive and drugs are cheaper and that you have to buy bottled water. They never tell me how glad they are that I live in a time where the standard of living is higher or where I could travel internationally merely to enjoy other cultures. Yes, there are epidemics, highly destructive weapons and new means for criminal activity but every generation has faced their own trials. In previous generations we condoned slavery, denied women the right to vote, thought Elvis's sexuality was straight from the devil and had the CIA giving random people LSD because they were not yet aware of its long term affects. Every generation has had to face the modern problems before them and therefore every generation has to be strong in different ways. The way children are now raised also sheds light onto the problems of this modern generation. In times passed if a child was hyperactive you sat them down and scared the fear of god into them and hoped they got over it. Now people are taking in ridiculously young children and saying they are hyperactive and need medicating. Small children are supposed to be hyperactive, unfortunately the generation before us was raised in the big psychology boom and thinks every problem needs a doctor's help. Obesity has become a plague because parents began using food as a reward instead of spending time with their children. Instead of taking a child to a park its so much easier just to buy them a scoop of triple fudge swirl and sit them in front of a television. To say the problems with this generation are inherent and it was something in the water is utter and complete bullshit. Thats the people who raised this generation trying to put the blame on anyone but themselves. The media, the government and the PTA are pointing the finger at us. Telling us we are more violent, more self destructive, more uncontrollable than any other generation. What do you think they told the children on the sexual revolution in the '60s? or of the '80s party children? Everyone generation is the worst according to their predecessors. Every generation is remember for the changes they made in an almost fond way. My parents will talk about how they protested the war and lived like real hippies in the day but I bet their parents were less then enthused by it. I don't think our generation will be remember for its ADHD or its newer, harder drugs or its unwed teenage mothers. I think it will be noted for its progressiveness, its inclusion of all things new and its willingness to push the boundaries. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [2 comments] |
|
| The Truth is in the Music. | June 29, 2006, 5:03PM |
 by: Homo_Tool_the_Prince |
|
I am watching A Perfect Circle. And I want to cry. I cannot understand what it is to hurt like Maynard. I can not understand what it is to hate like him. But if I had a god, if I had an idol, it is Maynard. He is no god, not even an angel, but he is beautiful. Maynard has a speaking voice that is annoying as all hell. He sounds like he's pinching his nose when he talks. I can barely listen to him talking at times. His singing voice is the most amazing I've heard in all my seventeen years of human life. Certainly there may be some of you who know better, who see better and know more talent. Perhaps. But for me, for this one child sitting in front of this plasma screen in a condo in Chesapeake, Virginia with a five year old boy who is trying to sing "The Outsider" because he wants to make his sister smile, for this one girl who is no girl, this man, this one human being has more talent than any creature ever before to set foot in a recording studio, or indeed to open his mouth. Maynard is not like your precious Billy Joe Armstrong, not like Lil' Jon or Paul Wall. He is not Gerard Way with makeup to make him pretty. He is not God, not Satan, nor angel, nor demon. He is man, and he is flawed, maybe more than most. He is damaged. He is damage itself in a greater manifestation than I can describe. His damage, his flaws are beautiful. He has talent like nothing I've ever known. Most singers, most vocalists cannot truly sing. If they can, it's usually nowhere as good live as on CD- not as good as their voice sounds electronically manipulated. But Maynard....he doesn't sound as good live as he does electronically- he sounds better. It scares me, really, how amazing his voice is.....and how driven he is. I have dreamed of possessing talent like that my entire life. At times it doesn't seem possible that he is human. That's not to say, of course, that the rest of A Perfect Circle, and the rest of Tool, aren't damn near supernatural in their talent....because they, too, are scary in the amount of talent they have. I don't quite understand how human beings could have the degree of ability that the eight of them have ( APC and Tool), But Maynard is special to me because, of course, I am a singer. ....I don't expect some kind of awesome power from Maynard. He slips and falls and fails like I do, yes. I've heard his voice crack before. I know that he is no more unnatural than I am, than my sister's kid brother annoying the shit out of me behind me. When I listen to Tool or to A Perfect Circle, I listen for Maynard to catch his breath. I listen for the sound of him gasping, catching his breath. Because that sound, more than anything else, is my proof that he is not an alien. Not a god. He is human. And that makes him more amazing than any magical power ever could. | |
topic: Music Reviews | |
[reply] [5 comments] |
|
| MY THOUGHTS AND THE TRUTH ABOUT EMO's | June 29, 2006, 3:22AM |
 by: Frozen_Chaotic_Souls |
|
Emos Okay, so I don't think I've written up a rant about emos yet. That is actually quite surprising as to how much I really hate emos. Shall I start on my rant? Too bad, it's not your decision to make, however, it is mine, and I have chosen to rant. Too bad for those who didn't want me to start yet. What is emo, you ask? An emo is: "genre of softcore punk music that integrates unenthusiastic melodramatic 17 year olds who dont smile, high pitched overwrought lyrics and inaudible guitar rifts with tight wool sweaters, tighter jeans, itchy scarfs (even in the summer), ripped chucks with favorite bands signature, black square rimmed glasses, and ebony greasy unwashed hair that is required to cover at least three-fifths of the face at an angle" Another way of putting it is: "a group of white, mostly middle-class well-off kids who find imperfections in there life and create a ridiculous, depressing melodrama around each one. They often take anti-depressants, even though the majority don't need them" Now, why would anybody in their right mind dare to think of even associating themselves with this style and genre of music? That's a question that still boggles my mind, and the worst part about it is that this style is becoming ever increasingly more popular in the world. What is this world coming to? I honestly don't know anymore, and I'm afraid to find out where exactly we'll be in 5 years. Emos are the most self-centered people I can think of. They do nothing but bitch and whine about their lives and their emotions that should be non-existant, just like their problems. Emos fail to understand that EVERYBODY'S LIFE SUCKS. They're not the only ones with a problem. If they have a problem, plenty of people have had it before them. It's not a hard concept to grasp, yet each and every day millions of kids continue to MISS that concept. These kids need to WAKE UP. They're not the only ones with problems, and they have it nowhere near as bad as many more people. As the second definition above stated, most of these kids are coming from middle-class loving homes where most of their problems are a figment of their retarded imaginations. The fact that these numbers of teenaged morons is increasing daily just boggles my mind. Emos tend to cling to their diaries and live journals like releasing their emotions is going to get them any sympathy. What kind of crap is this? Nobody wants to hear their melodramatic bs that they spew because they THINK that the world is out to get them. I honestly don't care to read about how they were dumped that day. They need to wake up and realize that plenty of others were dumped as well... THAT DAY. If they would search LJ and MySpace for those who had been dumped, they'd probably find plenty of others, except every other non-emo isn't complaining about how much their life sucks because of it and how the world is out to get them. They have the realization that the world continues to go around even if their heart is broken. They move on, they don't sulk over the same god damned problems simply because it hurts. Maybe they should take a step back and ask themselves WHY they were dumped. Maybe because of their bleek outlook on life? Maybe because wearing all black is a stupid statement of one's style? Because their music is filled with nothing but suicidal bs that only makes one feel WORSE after listening to it? The fact that crying about bs only makes you that much more of a wimp? I'm sure one or more apply to it, and I'm sure I've left out hundreds of reasons as to why they were dumped, but obviously they're too stupid to see it. Their diaries and live journals (and/or myspaces) are an emos best friend, and if anybody wants to see what it's like to be inside the heads of one of these idiots, you won't have to look very far on either live journal or myspace to find one. Their clothing style is another stupid bs fad that these worthless teenagers have clinged onto. Who in their right mind wears all black? This goes for goths too, but that's another topic for another day. I mean, do you think you look good in nothing but black? Is this style to symbolize that their "mourning" over their bs lives? Are they all of a sudden hardcore because they're wearing all black? That's certainly not what I get from it. I see weakness in black. It tells me that they have no personality; they're just another souless drone in today's society feeding off of the mass produced bs that today's media is throwing at them. It tells me that they have no individuality. Their hair is absolutely horrible. It's greasy, long, and unwashed. It looks absolutely tacky, and only makes them look even more ridiculous. Their studded belts and tacky bracelets also add to their pathetic genre and style of mass produced bs. Their music is even worse. It's got a horrible sound to it, and it makes you depressed just listening to it, and that's not even the lyrics. A couple of examples of their music would be Dashboard Confessional and From First to Last. Now, I don't suggest anybody actually go out and listen to them, but if you do, be prepared to desire to destroy your eardrums and never hear again due to the natural rancidity of their music. There's not much to say about their music other than it just sucks something horrible. I attempted to listen to it before, and I nearly drove myself insane trying to listen to that bs. If you're strong enough to not cringe at the sound, either you're stronger than I am, or you're deaf. Either way, I won't aspire to do the same. The crying... oh, I probably shouldn't get myself started on this, but it's a rant, so what the heck? These little pussies sit and cry because they can't handle all this "drama" and these "problems" that exist in their lives. I'm all for letting one's emotions out, but not when they're making up these emotions. Nothing is that bad where one has to sit and cry all day over these problems because they can't simply figure out that by sitting there crying about it, they're not making anything better. They could simply go out and do something else rather than sit and cry, but oh no, that'd be the SMART thing to do, and emos can never be counted on to do the smart thing. Instead, they feel that crying to one another is going to make things all better. Sorry to break it to them, but it won't. Last thing I have to complain about is their cutting. Cutting themselves to feel better. How exactly does that work? "*cry cry* I'm going to cut myself because my life sucks." Cutting oneself is no solution to one's (non-existant) problems. That only shows they're just that much more weak that they must do physical harm to themselves to somehow feel better. If that's not the most retarded thing I've ever heard of, I don't know what is. These morons could just all do us a favor and remember to go vertically down their wrists, not horizontally. If they want to cut themselves, they might as well go all the way and kill themselves while they're at it. I don't need bs styles to pollute my future-kids' minds, and I sure as hell don't care to continue to look at these sad individuals. On second thought, anybody with a cut on their wrists inflicted by themselves needs to be locked into some insane asylum. At least this way we can maintain to protect the sanctity of life while removing these pests from today's society. Only in a perfet world would this happen, but such is not reality. The only thing we can do about it is to stay one step ahead of this trend and hope for its demise. In conclusion, emos suck. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [7 comments] |
|
| How Poor People Live. | June 24, 2006, 5:02AM |
 by: MrMikeyRisin |
|
I wish I could take credit for this but it is off of Victor Wooten's website. One day a father of a very wealthy family took his son on a trip to the country with the firm purpose of showing his son how poor people live. They spent a couple of days and nights on the farm of what would be considered a very poor family. On their return from their trip, the father asked his son, "How was the trip?" "It was great, Dad." "Did you see how poor people live?" the father asked. "Oh yeah," said the son. "So, tell me, what did you learn from the trip?" asked the father.! The son answered: "I saw that we have one dog and they had four. We have a pool that reaches to the middle of our garden and they have a creek that has no end. We have imported lanterns in our garden and they have the stars at night. Our patio reaches to the front yard and they have the whole horizon. We have a small piece of land to live on and they have fields that go beyond our sight. We have servants who serve us, but they serve others. We buy our food, but they grow theirs. We have walls around our property to protect us, they have friends to protect them." The boy's father was speechless. Then his son added, "Thanks, Dad, for showing me how poor we are." | |
topic: Philosophy | |
[reply] [8 comments] |
|
| Prejudice and Acceptance | June 17, 2006, 11:44PM |
 by: lovelette81 |
|
Prejudice is something that is hidden in all of us. Even the most liberal people have a secret part of them that judges others. This is normal and part of human nature. But what is not normal is letting prejudice rule you. There are many good people on this website who are kind, well-read, well-spoken, and very nice to talk to. But there are also people on here that let prejudice rule their lives. You can recognize those people right away. Their dislikes section is far larger than their likes section. They claim to hate: wiggers, cutters, preps, emos, rap, Christians, parents, scenesters, juggalos, and injustice. It's it so ironic that they claim to hate injustice and prejudice, but they claim to hate whole groups of people based on stereotypes and limited experiences with those types of people. The people who claim to dislike preps or emos or wiggers may meet someone like that who they really empathize with, and they may even build a friendship. And while I'm on the subject, what is a wigger anyway? A white person who embraces 'black culture.' What is black culture? Is it all about rap music, baggy pants and bling? Is that all it takes to be a wigger? Than what does it mean if there's a black person who chooses not to embrace those things? Does it make them any less of what they are? No. So, really the whole wigger putdown is just a continuation of racial stereotypes. Just be who you are and don't let anyone judge you. Do what makes you happy. Listen to the music you like, wear the clothes you enjoy, and be friends with the people you love regardless of what other people think. And to the judgemental people, if you used all of that energy to love and understand people instead of mocking them and hating them, the world might be a better place. | |
topic: Life | |
[reply] [6 comments] |
|
| Spitting into the wind on Immigration | June 14, 2006, 5:32PM |
 by: Cure |
|
Fuss in Washington notwithstanding, there's an easy way to reduce illegal immigration. It doesn't involve building fences or spending hundreds of billions to create an intrusive bureaucracy to hunt down illegals one by one and deport them. Just introduce a fraud-proof national ID card with biometric information; make it illegal, with real penalties, for employers to hire anyone, citizen or immigrant, who doesn't have one. Presto. Businesses would no longer be able to profess the impossibility of judging who's legal and who isn't. Most of the jobs illegal immigrants do would disappear, and many if not most of the immigrants would leave for the same reason they came--better opportunities elsewhere. Before we go down this road, however, would we really like the consequences? With 12 million illegals in the country, whole sectors of our economy exist only because of immigrant labor. Farms would shut down along with jobs for suppliers of seeds, packaging and ancillary services. Jobs for waiters, maître d's and chefs would vanish, not just those of immigrant busboys, kitchen hands and cleaners. Some 1.2 million illegals are believed to work in construction. If the cost of home building goes up, demand goes down: Less wood is sold, fewer nails, fewer power tools, fewer pickup trucks. Contractors would make less profit; ergo, Harley-Davidson would sell fewer Road Kings with all the chrome and finery. Armchair wonks say, "Enforce the law and damn the consequences." Every time the government does, however, a few of those couch warriors suddenly become vocal activists on the other side. It's their employer, their brother-in-law, their neighbor who finds himself facing criminal charges. It's their house that doesn't get finished. Don't be surprised if some of the latest politically inspired crackdowns end the same way. Blowback in the Cincinnati area is already growing against the arrest last month of four foremen for Fischer Homes, a well-liked local home builder. In search of a respectable argument, liberal enthusiasts for a border clampdown have lately adopted the obnoxious and condescending reification of "unskilled labor" popularized by some economists. It may be true in some sense that illegals hold down the wages of low-wage workers, but it tells you nothing useful. It tells you only that the supply of immigrant workers has an impact on the wages of mostly immigrant workers for jobs that mostly would not exist if immigrant workers weren't available to fill them. The very category "unskilled labor" is misleading. Any American worker, however backward, has one important skill advantage over most illegal immigrants: English. And all workers have a skill that leads to more skills: They can learn. In turn, a decently functioning job market rewards people for acquiring skills, not for remaining unskilled--perverse is the idea of wanting to reduce labor competition for unskilled jobs in order to make unskilled jobs more desirable. OK, let's ban unskilled immigrants altogether. Let's welcome all the doctors and engineers who want to come but reserve the no-skill jobs for Americans. Let's make it so attractive for Americans not to acquire skills that we can close our schools. Think of the money we'd save. If this is crazy, it's only so because of the crazy premise. Immigrant workers are a resource--no economy is better off for taking resources away. Mexicans--let's admit this is largely about the Mexican wave--have crossed the border for jobs ever since there was a border. And amnesty was once routine because the statute of limitations on illegal entry ran out in five years. If the hypocrisy of our current system bothers you--and it should, because it allows workers to come and toil for us without granting them legal status--it's no denigration of the idea of law and lawfulness to admit to ourselves we have a bad law on our hands. What's a better approach? Even guest worker solutions are artful fudgery--a guest worker won't go home any more reliably than an illegal will. So how about just open the door to anyone willing to put down a refundable entry deposit (say, $2,000) in return for a biometric work card? At a stroke, this would take the profit out of a vast underground industry. Chinese "snakeheads" cadge upwards of $40,000 per illegal immigrant. Latin "coyotes" get $2,000 or more. Not to mention the sizeable business done by document forgers and traffickers in stolen Social Security numbers. This deposit could be charged off against future income tax liability (note, not payroll taxes), an incentive for immigrants to stay legal and move up into the bracket-worthy classes. It could be refunded when they leave the country--an incentive to return home if jobs become scarce in the U.S. Polls say Americans want immigration cut down and they don't want amnesty for illegals, yet the Senate just passed an immigration reform that would increase immigration and proffer amnesty. The system works!--at least it works better than it did when Congress jumped off a cliff with the Volstead Act, knowing that though Americans liked the idea of liquor prohibition, they'd end up hating the consequences. This doesn't please the border warriors, but they're spitting into the wind. In his table talk, a certain German dictator observed that religions have far more stability than states, which tend to come and go, swept away by the tides of history. The U.S., a young nation but already one of the world's longest-lived political states, has a chance to beat the odds thanks to our freedom from any of the usual fatal exclusivisms. But it will have to accept that it exists on a continent whose fastest-growing cultural force is Spanish speakers. | |
topic: Rants | |
[reply] [29 comments] |
|
| The concequence of change | June 10, 2006, 11:49AM |
 by: Murderous_Breeze |
|
Ive been on this earth for almost 18 years now, not nearly long enough to understand even %3 percent of it, but the one thing i understand about this society and world we live in, is that we do not need to understand anything. This article is going to be complicated maybe to some of the readers, its whats been on my mind lately, and i thought to express it as easy as i can. Well since the dawning of civilization, we as humans have been interested in understanding and learning our surrounding environment, i think its called evolution. We try to give our ideas to one another in order for the problem to be fixed, sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesnt, and when it does work, the people get labeled in history as great heroes and thinkers, but when it doesnt, we get put in the section of a nazi leader im sure you all know of. But one thing ive been thinking about is that, their is no need to understand this world and its true purpose and way of existance, alot of you may say it will with future problems and we can expand our knowledge of science and math. As we humans evolve we get smarter and more stupid at the same time, we unlock parts of our brain but also we unlock the true meaning of ignorance and we INTEND to destroy the land around us and the people inside, then we are forced to deal with the problems that we had created, and create new problems, a ever circle of screw ups. Where am i going with this you may ask? Well its simple, i have read alot of articles and re-read even my one about masonry and realised something very crucial to our existance, we should stop and think about what we really are doing. Alot of people out their dont believe that one person can make a difference, that if one person stands up among the rest of them and says "NO! thats wrong!" then he is silly, but it all starts with one person, that one person is the spark that the fuse needs to be lit. We must all look at the concequence of all our actions, maybe good, maybe bad. Giving that homeless guy that looks like a junkie that extra 5 dollars for his next hit makes you think you have done good, but in reality you have just given him less time to live. I find this article very important, alot of you will not, but i hope you atleast think about this. My main points here are this: Evolution can be a miraculous and sometimes marvel of a spectacle in modern life and future assurance of our preservation of life, but is it really going to save us? or destroy us? their are millions of animals out their and plant life that are facing extinction, you hear about it on the news, but people get sick of it, thinking its not a big thing, but it really is happening. We are changing for the worst, and we as individuals need to stop it, not try to understand it. Secondly. And this is probably the most important part of this article, and these will be my closing statements. Treat others the way you wish to be treated, give a hand to those who have lost a hand, give hope to those who have been raped of it, give a life to those in need of one. | |
topic: Life | |
[reply] [0 comments] |
|
| Elvis Presley: King of Controversy | June 4, 2006, 4:53PM |
by: lovelette81 |
|
"His music is made by cretinous goons singing sly, lewd, in plain fact, dirty lyrics. It manages to be the martial music of every delinquent on the face of the earth. It is the most brutal, ugly, desperate form of expression it has been my misfortune to hear."(A quote made by Frank Sinatra, Manson 245) It's hard to believe that this person is speaking about Elvis Presley, but not too long ago, Elvis was considered to be very controversial. People saw him as a threat to the American way of life--racial isolation, sexual repression, and fear of the unfamiliar--and did everything that they could to ban him and his music. The media did as much as possible to undermine his success. Some of the more popular musical artists in the early 1950's were Frank Sinatra, Patti Page, Perry Como, Vera Lyn, and Bing Crosby. (wikipedia.org) Their music reflected the ideals of the time; their songs were mellow, family-friendly, and non-threatening. Teenagers listened to Hit Parade, which bowdlerized the more popular songs of the time to make sure that nothing improprietous corrupted their innocent youth. The most popular musical styles of the day were torch songs, country, and big band jazz. Bebop and R&B (which was still called "race music") were still relatively unknown to most people. "Race music" was a general term used to describe music created by Black artists. Blues, jazz, soul, and gospel were all lumped together under this term and White America, was for the most part, isolated from Black music. In such a time of segregation, the only way that Black music could gain popularity is if it were anglicized by a popular White musician. Singers like Pat Boone made their whole living off of whitewashing Black music. (wikipedia) People were still too racist to fully accept a Black artist, but music producers knew that Black music had the possibility to become popular--as long as a white man was singing it. "If I could just find a white man who had the Negro sound and the Negro feel, I could make a million dollars"(Szlatmary 54) In 1954, Elvis Presley recorded "That's Alright." Strongly influenced by Black artists, he achieved the sound that the producer was looking for. "When Moore, the lead guitarist, heard the playback, he was shocked. He told the bassist, Bill Black, that he feared the racially ambiguous sound slamming out of the speaker would spark local outrage in the segregated city of 300,000 and possibly generate enough denunciation to drive the group out of town"(White 47) Moore was right to be concerned. When "That's Alright" was aired on the radio people's feelings ranged from bewildered to outraged. Almost immediately after the song stopped, people began to call the radio station. "The largely White audience was accustomed to hearing Black artists and even some white performers adapting Black fare to their own discreet idioms. But the lean, shiversome energy of "That's All Right" was unnerving in its newness."(White 51) The song was a blend of country and traditional Black music--rockabilly. Tim White described it as being the "death knell of segregation and the seed of an agonized orgy of national self-hatred and cultural shame," but that was a huge overstatement. People were extremely reluctant to accept rockabilly music in a time when ambiguities of all kinds were suspect. Elvis knew that his style was imitative of Black music, and unlike other musicians of the time, did not perpetrate the pretense that he had no influences. "The colored folks been singing it and playing it just like I'm doin' now, man. Down in Tupelo, I used to heard old Arthur Crudup bang his box the way I do now, and I said if I ever got to the place where I could feel all old Arthur felt, I'd be a music man like nobody ever saw."(Elvis, webinfoctrac) People were threatened by the emergence of Black music into popular culture, and Black musicians were angry that their style was being stolen. Elvis Presley's most popular song, "Hound Dog" was stolen from Big Mama Thornton. It was her only claim to fame, holding the number one spot in the Billboard Music R&B chart for nine weeks. Black musicians were outraged and Laverne Baker even petitioned to change copyright laws so that White musicians couldn't cover songs by Black musicians (classicbands.com) White people were unaccepting of rockabilly music as well. Encyclopedia Britannica, with obvious racism, referred to rock n' roll music as "jungle music."(author unknown, digitialdreamdoor.com) Parents were afraid of how it might influence their children, and ethnocentrics took it as proof that Black people were trying to take over the world. The only people who seemed to enjoy it were teenagers, especially the girls. The 1950's were a time of sexual repression. Everything was expected to be wholesome and free of anything even remotely suggestive. If it wasn't it was banned, boycotted, or destroyed. But Elvis wasn't wholesome, and girls loved him for it. "A sneering, rebellious expression covered Presley's face. The singer grabbed a microphone as though he was going to wrench it from its metal base, and he barked, snarled, whimpered, and shouted into it."(Szlatmary 32) Elvis was different than other musical artists of the time. He showed passion in his performance. He was wild compared to the other performers and that's what made girls notice him. "The extreme reaction to Presley came from teens, especially teenaged girls who had just reached adolescence. They perceived him as a sexual call to arms."(Szlatmary 33) Parents, reporters, and critics were all frightened and a bit horrified by the way girls reacted to him. They went wild when they saw him, fainting and rushing the stage. Some girls even attacked him at his concerts. "On July 4, 1955 fans shredded Presley's pink shirt and tore the shoes from his feet. One female admirer suffered a gash in her leg at the concert. 'But who cares if it left a scar,' she told a reporter. 'I got it trying to see Elvis and I'm proud of it.'"(Szlatmary 33) An even bigger source of consternation was Elvis' dancing. His bumping and grinding was considered to be inconceivably obscene. It drew so much protest that when he appeared on television, they cameras only shot him from the waist up. Reporters had a field day. "From watching Elvis Presley, it is evident that his skill lies in another direction. He is a rock and roll variation of one of the most standard acts in show business; the virtuoso of the hootchy-kootchy. The gyration never had anything to do with the world of popular music and still doesn't."(Hopkins 97) Cosmo magazine described Elvis as "behaving like a sex maniac in public"(wikipedia.com) and one clergyman called Elvis' dancing "the whirling dervish of sex."(Webinfoctrac) Critics accused him of being uncouth and uncivilized. A music critic in 1956 was disgusted by "the sight of young Mr. Presley caterwauling his unintelligible lyrics in an inadequate voice, during a display of primitive movement difficult to describe in terms suitable to a family newspaper."(Webinfoctrac) Elvis was even accused of trying to corrupt children. "It is at an age when the awareness of sex is both thoroughly natural and normal. But what is new is the willingness of reputable businessmen to exploit these critical factors beyond all reasonable grounds. When Presley executes his bumps and grinds, even the twelve year old's curiosity may be over stimulated."(Hopkins 98) Elvis Presley was simply too controversial for such a repressed culture. Magazines wrote articles on him, calling him a jailbird or a dope peddler. They attacked his diction, the quality of his voice, his movement. (Hopkins 98) He was met with even more disapproval by religious people. Elvis was seen as the "King of Sin" by religious authorities. As soon as he appeared on the Ed Sullivan show, Catholics began to boycott both Elvis Presley and the Ed Sullivan Show. A newspaper article was written about it. "Presley and his voodoo of frustration and defiance have become symbols of our country and we are sorry to come upon Ed Sullivan in the role of promoter. Your Catholic viewers, Mr. Sullivan, are angry." (Hopkins 101) A Minneapolis-based Catholic youth magazine launched a campaign for "clean lyrics in pop songs" and targeted Elvis Presley's "Wear My Ring around Your Neck" because it promoted going steady. (classicbands.com) People became even more upset when Elvis released his Christmas album. They felt that to have such an evil person singing religious songs was sacrilege. His album was banned by many radio stations. One disk jockey was fired for playing Elvis Presley's version of "White Christmas."(classicbands.com) When a disk jockey in Canada heard how many radio stations were banning Elvis' Christmas album, he played the entire album on air and incited listeners to call in and tell him their opinion. Out of eight-hundred callers, only fifty-six found the album offensive. (classicbands.com) In actuality, Elvis was a deeply religious man. There's an anecdote that Elvis was giving a concert and at the end, a woman walked up to him and put a crown on his head and said "You're the King!" Elvis took the crown off of his head and said "No, honey. I'm not the King. Christ is the King. I'm just a singer."(wikipedia.org) "Elvis illustrates the fine line in traditional Southern culture between Puritanism and hedonism, between blues shouting and gospel singing, between Saturday night and Sunday morning." (Reed, webinfoctrac) Despite his popularity, Elvis was a deeply religious man. Sociologist, John Reed said "Aside from the way he moved his lower-body, he was a gospel singing mama's boy." (Reed, webinfoctrac) People were weary of rock n' roll in general, not just Elvis Presley. They were afraid of the reactions it caused and its suggestive undertones. "Tin Pan Alley has unleashed a new monster, a sort of nightmare of rhythm. Some of our new disk jockeys have put emotional TNT on their turntables. Rock n' roll gives young hoodlums an excuse to get together. It inflames teenagers and is obscenely suggestive."(Hopkins 99) The man who spoke these words seems to have a point. There were, and still are, many riots at rock n' roll concerts. Alan Freed organized the first rock n' roll concert for March 21, 1952 and there were massive riots. (wikipedia.org) Six years later, Alan Freed was indicted for inciting a riot when the audience stormed the stage at a concert he was promoting. (digitaldreamdoor.com) When Bill Haley and the Comets toured Europe in 1957, there were violent riots and there were frequent riots at the Orioles concerts in 1949 (digitaldreamdoor.com) When Elvis Presley performed at the Mississippi-Alabama fair in 1956, a hundred National Guardsmen surrounded the stage so that they could control the crowd. (wikipedia.org) A rock and roll show in Connecticut was cancelled because authorities were afraid that there would be riots too aggressive for the police to control. Later on, the state of Connecticut banned rock concerts entirely. (digitaldreamdoor.com) A lot of people saw censorship as the solution for the problems being caused by rock n' roll, so radio stations became even stricter about what could and could not be played on the air. Many communities banned the playing of rock n' roll not only on the radio but in any public setting. (digitaldreamdoor.com) When a radio station in Alabama received over 15,000 complaint letters about "dirty records" being plated on the air, they promised they would censor all controversial music, especially R&B and rock n' roll. (classicbands.com) The managers at a St. Louis radio station completely banned rock and roll music. The disk jockey's gave every record a "farewell spin" and then smashed all of the records into pieces. Robert Convey, the station manager, called the action "a simple weeding out of undesirable music." (classicbands.com) In a time of sexual repression, rigid social rules, racial segregation, intolerance of anything considered controversial, and strict religious policies, Elvis Presley was considered wild, out of control, and a threat to every moral code America held dear. Critics denounced him, parents feared him, priests condemned him, boys emulated him, and girls lusted for him. He was a symbol for all of the things they feared; sexual abandon, hedonism. He was a threat to the racial divides as well. It's for those reasons that Elvis Presley was banned, boycotted, and loved. | |
topic: Essays | |
[reply] [6 comments] |
|
| Live. Learn. Listen | June 3, 2006, 8:27PM |
 by: untold truth |
|
Ok so before you read this know that this essay was written for my challenge and change class and we had to write on some particular scenes from the movie "Waking Life" if you haven't seen it yet, you should. it's a kickass movie. And now the essay. The first scene I chose was the one where the guy sets himself on fire. I think this scene talks about chaos and how man seems to crave it, that I almost completely agree with. Since the dawn of the human race there has been violence. The caveman could beat another caveman because he stole his food. And then later on we progressed into wars with each other, because the other person was wrong in how they viewed life. People do come up with brilliant ideas that could really help out the world, but then in the end, it just goes to hell in a hand basket. I mean, Hitler came in and tried to take over the world and create a “perfect race”, and that was a bad idea. The concept I think came from good intentions, but then he went overboard and killed people because they didn’t fit into his mold of the “perfect” person. That just blew the idea out the window. But the concept that started the idea was good, to have everyone united, people would not have to fight or go to war, a place where everyone got along and there was no need for useless death. And then he went crazy and killed people, and in doing so helped to prove my point that man cannot seem to live without chaos. I think it’s the shock-and-awe system that gets peoples attention. And I don’t mean the war tactic, I mean shocking people into reality. Showing then that what is happening is wrong and it needs to be fixed. Things like Gandhi fasting to the point of death, the student protest in Tiananmen Square, pictures from Auschwitz, the Nazi concentration camps for the Jews during WW2, things like these are moments that force people to stop and think about what is going on in the world, they force them to think about the chaos and horrors in the world. The media can play a part in society that’s beneficial for everyone. They can let us know about the things that are wrong in the world, the things we need to fix, but they can also take that power and totally abuse it. It’s a fact that black crimes have gone down a considerable amount but the media still over-sensationalizes the crimes and shows black crimes something like 1000% more then what is actually happening in the world. I think that the media is an outlet for this craving of chaos and it helps to sate the thirst for destruction that we seem to need to get by in life. The media is a way for us to get used to the idea that there are evils out there and they can’t all be beaten, and evil sometimes does win. Life is not a romance novel where the good guys win and the bad guys fail, it’s not the way it is. So people use the media as a way to get us used to the idea that we can’t always win. It also shows us the useless pissing contests between countries that end up in war, but its shown in a way that will make us hate the country who threatens our “morals” and it shows us in a way that keeps us patriotic to our country. Most wars are pointless; it’s just a waste of life. But then again, there are sometimes where someone needs to step in and say “um..hello?! This is wrong and stupid.” Take Hitler again. His concept, good, but after he went crazy, war was needed to stop him. So although a lot of the wars are pointless there are times where it is needed to prevent further destruction and chaos. Back to the media… it disconnects us from society, making tragedy seem like something surreal. The media portrays the downfall of the human race as something that is just to be observed, not fixed. They show us exactly what is going on, how we are destroying our selves, and how we are damaging the very place in which we live, and we still do nothing about it. Why?? Shouldn’t we care about stuff like that? Shouldn’t we want to fix where we are going wrong? Isn’t that what we should be doing? It seems that the only way to get some attention from people is to do something extreme to prove your point. NOT something that affects other people, like bombing a building or shooting someone, but to yourself, to make an example of yourself for the world to take notes on. The guy who set himself on fire was doing just that. He was proving his point to the world. He was sending everyone a message, because that was the only way that he could get his voice heard. So it seems that the saying “actions speak louder then words” is true. Words just can’t communicate the way that actions can, especially body language. Body language is a key part to all of human existence. Our bodies can tell a story even when no words are spoken. Things like stress, happiness, exhaustion will show. When you are feeling a certain emotion, oftentimes people can tell, because of your body language. And when you just can’t say the words, you can find an action to help get your point across, a gesture, a piece of artwork. Everything can become a symbol if you just look and see the possibilities. Now the train guy got me to thinking, we all go through life thinking that we have everything figured out and our world is set in stone, but in the dream state, we can’t always control what happens. It’s a non-definitive state of being, where there is no real time and no real space that we can say is concrete. So if we are so hell bent on control, then why haven’t we jumped into the dream world to try and control what happens there? Why haven’t we devoted money to science labs to figure out what’s going on and how to control it? I think it’s because we try not to think of the dream world as something that we can dominate and control where we have someway to let ourselves just be free. It makes sense, at least to me, that we would want some place where we could go and just do whatever we please and not have anyone say anything about it. The dream world is about the only place we have left to go to keep away from all the pressures of life. Also, while in a dream state, we can figure things out that we don’t understand in the living world. Our sub-conscious helps us solve problems that we can’t figure out when we are awake. We often travel through situations in our dreams that help us realize the answer to the problems we are currently having in our daily lives. I’ve heard people say that they never dream at all, but in actual fact, most people have about 100 dreams a night, you just don’t remember them. But when you wake up in the morning, after a sleep where you apparently didn’t have any dreams, sometimes you can fix a situation that you couldn’t the day before. This could be because you were figuring out the solution in the dream world. I think that we have to live in the moment, everyday of our lives because life is just bringing us down, and we’re all drowning. People in general seem to crave that instant when everything is real, we all want a real moment with real people where we are seen for ourselves and we’re not disconnected anymore. For major parts in our lives, in things like school for example, nothing but a minimal robot reaction is required of us. Solve the problem. Write this out. Sit there and listen. There are few times when a real reaction occurs. We have to be able to expand our minds and let ourselves be free if even for a moment. We have to be able to open ourselves up and look at everything and take everything in so we can break free from the robot reactions and live free for a moment. We seem to live for those kinds of moments instead of actually having them. Those moments that we catch are small and in between, because we, as the human race, tend over-rationalize things. When we begin to rationalize, we ruin these precious moments because we lose that sense of freedom. We try to think over what is happening to us instead of just letting the moment happen, which is why those moments are so fast and fleeting. When we try to tell people about our experiences we never know if it gets across. Words are a form of our expressions to each other. We make sounds to tell each other about what is happening or what is about to happen, we talk to communicate. When we talk, we try to feel some kind of connection with the other person. We want some kind of spiritual bonding to take place so that we know that the other person understands where we are coming from. But can they really understand? I mean, yes, they must have some kind of pre-existing notion of what we are talking about, but I don’t think its possible for them to understand exactly how we feel, because it’s a deeply personal thing that just can’t be shared with words. Although you would think that it would break us apart, it most often brings us together. Men and women each have their own form of language. Both are very opposite in how they communicate, but those differences frequently compliment each other in a way so well that we can understand each other better. They each have different ideas on what things like love and war are like; they each have different opinions on how the world should work. In the end, it’s that difference that brings us together. It’s that separation that brings us closer. If we all thought the same, that might be a bit boring. So, our differences compliment each other and bring us closer together. In any kind of relationship, we want that kind of connection that brings us closer. We want to be able to communicate and be understood, and although the kind of understanding that someone wants could only be done through telepathy, we still want someone to be there for us, we want someone there who will make sure that we are ok. We want some sort of transcendence through our words, something that will take us higher then we’ve ever been before. That’s why the relationships we build with people is so important, we need that feeling of safety and protection, but we also need that feeling of exhilaration that we get when we connect with people. So whether you take your graces form Gandhi or your parents, try to make the best of your life that you can. “Try to be the best you” as my mother said, which means trying to do something and working hard at it. Make an example of yourself for those around you. If you don’t have the guts to do something extreme like fasting to the point of death or lighting yourself on fire, just live your life to the best of your ability. Live as an example for those around you so that, if they choose, they might pick up on it and live their lives possibly for the better. I think that by living your life by making honest connections with people and having those free moments that you can cherish, is one of the best ways to live. You have to try and be yourself, and if you screw up once in a while, who cares. Creation comes from imperfection. The mistakes and the cracks in our lives can make our relationships with those we are close with better. Some people even say that mistakes are the Divine’s intervention, saying that it wasn’t the way to go. So either way, shit happens, you’ll get over it. Live. Learn. Listen. That’s all that counts. | |
topic: Essays | |
[reply] [6 comments] |
|
| The Da Vinci Code- book and movie | May 30, 2006, 5:13PM |
 by: XangelXmysticsX |
|
I watched this movie with the book fresh on my mind, as I had finished the book three days before I saw the movie. The book was magnificent. The movie, in comparison, was not so good. Where the book made the main female character an intelligent equal to the two main male characters, the movie made the female ignorant, and one of the men knew everything. Where the book made some of the characters innocent but misguided, the movie made them out right bad guys. The ending of the movie was drastically different than that of the book. If the movie had have been made BY THE BOOK, it would have equaled "The Passion" in the awe factor. I do like the movie ending slightly better than the book ending. The movie- as if I'd never read the book: Outstanding! A little bit of action, some blood, and a lot of subtitles. A typical Ron Howard film, actually. (Side note- whodathunk- little Opie making an anti church movie?) Leaves you on the edge of your seat wondering what's next, whodunnit, and why? The book: Great mystery novel. Dan Brown is a bit of a genius. He weaved bits and peices of truth in with a plot and story line and came up with something that the Catholic church boycotted! (Ironically, the book talks about the Catholic Church covering up history... then they boycot. I find that hilarious.) As I was reading, I was trying to figure out all of the clues just as hard as the main characters were. It's understandable that so many thought this book was non fiction. Dan Brown must have done quite a bit of research for this book. | |
topic: Movie Reviews | |
[reply] [3 comments] |
|
| pages: back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 next |