Shipka's Music Day/Guess My Theme Music or Never Judge a Person by Outward Appearance:
A presentation activity for the purpose of projecting/defining one's self through the use of sound/music.

Shipka's Forum Prompt:
Presentation Response

Music is a technology that we use to define ourselves and has the power to influence what we wear, how we speak and how we act. To what extent do you think this is true? Did you choose your music based on your interests and tastes, or are you tastes and interests defined by the music you listen to? To this end, does technology define us, or do we define it? Feel free to also discuss the results of our experiment, and whether any of the decisions revealed in the end were surprising to you.

C. Gatton's Response ·  N. Barsky's First Response ·  P.C. Paul's Response ·  Y. Martin's Response ·  A. Campbell's Response ·  K. Bailey's Response

M.J. Bowen's Response ·  E. Berman's Response ·  N. Barsky's Second Response ·  N. Horstman's Response ·  A. Reed's Response

E. Woodward's Response ·  B. Bauhaus' Response ·  A. Sheikh's Response ·  E. Jones' Response ·  S. Norfolk's Response ·  S. Miller's Response ·  R. Desai's Response

         Also, I do to some extent, listen to modern rap; however, I do not agree with most of the lyrics being used in rap songs nowadays; however, I do enjoy the up-beat of the music that lies behind the lyrics, thus, choosing to listen to this genre because of my interest in the sound rhythm.

         The next question-does technology define us or do we define technology? This is a very complex question, but I believe that the two come hand in hand, in other words, there is an intermingling between both. As time goes by, the line between the two becomes too obscure, or even, comes together completely, making it impossible to differentiate. Specific functions are assigned to technology when it is first introduced, but people use the same technology to form other functions unknown or realized by its inventor at the time. For example, the invention of eating utensils. Did we define this technology? Was the function of a fork to aide people in eating their food in an appropriate and well mannered fashion or was it originally intended for another use? Table etiquette has now become a way to define how educated we are or even has the power to separate society into social classes and ranks. The fork which went through different stages to become most fitting to the human hand, is now a way to define our homes. People invest in expensive silverware to make a statement of class and elegance.

The same goes with clothing, shoes, and other personal accessories. Clothing goes beyond function but is now used to make a personal expression about oneself. Women invest in uncomfortable foot-breaking shoes just to define the exterior of their foot and make yet another personal expression. Jewelry is another technology that we use to define who we are. So are socks and undergarments even—these things that most people in public don’t ever see. Makeup defines us or transforms our flaws for a certain amount of time. Ridding the gray strands of hair by dying one’s hair is yet another technology that we use to hide the aging process.

As Shipka has said in previous classes, the invention of the sidewalk governs her path to her home, office, class, etc. The parking lot spaces are drawn out for us so that we know where our boundaries are. Interior decorating gives us ways to define a personal space. The lines on college-ruled paper give us the rules for proper writing, as do many other technologies. We have let technology define us in a way where we now feel bound to it—we simply can’t imagine our lives without it. We become lost without having the rules laid out before us.

         As for the experiment in class, I’m with Yolanda on this one. You can never judge a book by its cover. I was surprised that people had identified me with “It’s a Beautiful Day.” The song, as Reshma said, is a very optimistic, ‘feel good’ song; but I still didn’t feel it quite defines me. I thought it was fun to do this experiment, especially when we aren’t quite familiar with one another. Our assumptions were based on physical attributes. We don’t actually know one another’s personalities to help aide us in our decisions, so really, the only resources we had were each other’s physical attributes and few comments that some have made in previous classes. I think it would’ve been interesting to keep the results anonymous and re-do the experiment at the end of the semester and then reveal the results. I feel there would be a difference and possibly a more accurate finding in the votes. By the end of the semester, we may have been able to grasp more of who we are through our words and expressions compared to how we choose to depict our physical selves. For example, Erika W. chose “American Woman” by Lenny Kravitz. I found it interesting because although a male sang it, no where in my mind did I consider a male choosing the song simply due to his lyrics and title of the song.

         While we all make quick observations about people through their physical choices in clothing, jewelry, hair styles/cuts/colors, shoes, backpacks, laptops, iPods, religious accessories, cologne/perfume fragrances, choice of cell phone holders, etc., I always try to keep an open mind as I would want others to do for me. There are too many levels in a person to judge one aspect or sum up a person in few adjectives or categorize him/her into a mold or stereotype. As I found out today, people will never fail to surprise one another.

         Also to respond to our favorite song of the moment, I would have to say my favorite in the pop world is Natasha Bedingfield’s latest song “Unwritten.” In the techno/house genre, Lio’s “Rapture” is my favorite song. It’s about two years old I believe, but it’s a goodie!

"I Must Live in Britain or Something" Response to C. Gatton's "It's a Beautiful Day :-)" by P.C. Paul
It is? I must live in Britain or something. It’s always raining. That’s another sound I like out of music. Stuff that sounds like driving rain. "The Chameleons" are great for that sound. "Can you hear the thunder?" Ah thunder and rain. What can I say, "I’m only happy when it rains. I’m only happy when it’s complicated. And although I know you can’t appreciate it, I’m only happy when it rains." I love to walk in a cold rain with a blistery wind and listen to "The Chameleons," as Basil Faulty once said about the weather of Britain, "It’s bracing." Hahahaha.

         I know Techno but that was a long time ago. (about 1989) Please explain to me how New Order got shoved into the Techno genre and Pet Shop Boys plus Erasure. I do not understand.

         "The next question-does technology define us or do we define technology? This is a very complex question, but I believe that the two come hand in hand…" Here I would say more like "Hand in Glove, the sun shines out of our behinds… The Smiths."

         "Specific functions are assigned to technology when it is first introduced, but people use the same technology to form other functions unknown or realized by its inventor at the time." Right. Who knew people would use the Internet to cheat on their SO’s, or stalk children.

         P.S. If I wanted to throw a curve ball I would have used John Philip Souza. Whaaaaaat? Marching Band music was Pop Music in its time. Why? No electricity. The way to amplify the sound was through the acoustics of the Band Stand. And would have thought that I listen to Glen Miller’s Orchestra? That is my parents Pop Music, or how about Mozart? I must be a recycled soul. It’s all Dddddejajajajajaja vvvvvvu "We have all been here before..." Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young.

A response to P.C. Paul's "I Must Live in Britain or Something" by N. Barsky
Techno is, of course, just short for "technology." (Interesting how we're always abbreviating technological terms. Refrigerator became fridge, television became TV, airplane became plane, telephone became phone, and cellular phone became cell phone. George Lucas had the right idea when he called his androids droids.) I think it gets confused with electronica: people lump any music that sounds remotely electronic into the techno genre. That's not to imply, of course, that marching bands weren't using technology.

         You appear to like a lot of the early eighties stuff. That's why I wasn't surprised that your choice was the New Order song, especially after our discussion about Orange Juice (who, by the way, would have sounded a lot cooler if they had called themselves the OJs) and post-punk. Never mind your self-described "conservative" appearance. I feel like an old guy myself when I hear someone of your age and appearance talking fondly of punk rock. Or when the classic rock stations play Nirvana. Or the fact that I dislike almost all the music from the last five years, and one of the only current bands I like is the White Stripes, who sound uncannily similar to Led Zeppelin.

A response to N. Barsky's "I Must Live in Britain or Something" by P.C. Paul
Thank you, I am aware of what the word “Techno” means as the Gen X generation came up with the term “Techno.” My question was if many of these groups that appeared on the scene as “unclassified” or became classified in the course of two years (in the 80’s) who re-classified them as “something else.” Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t there a specific for Techno, that is was 120 beats per minute and somewhere on the record label it was stamped such. (Which now I’m curious as to what the beat rate it for Ska?) Yes Electronica, but that once again becomes a real broad brush.

         Well they don’t have a category for my generation. We’re on the cusp of the Baby Boomers and the Gen X. There was sort of a detour bridge there a three way fork if you will. Late 70’s rock was becoming repetitive and Disco was dying. Out of the ashes of both emerged “Punk Rock” which was a little too extreme and viewed as a fad, as it dyed and evolved it became a little softer around the edges. 1980’s alternative music became the alternative to top 40 Dance Music and the continuation of Dinosaur Rock, (60’s 70’s sound, new bands).

A response to C. Gatton's "It's a Beautiful Day :-)" by N. Barsky
You like rap but you don't agree with the lyrics. I don't listen to the lyrics of songs enough to factor it much into my preferences. I've gone for years having favorite songs without knowing what they were saying. Why am I such a fan of Bob Dylan, then? Doesn't he have an "awful" voice, as most of the civilized world agrees? Isn't his only redeeming quality his songwriting ability? Well, that's one area where I'm weird. Laugh all you want, but I consider Bob Dylan a great singer. That's how bad my taste is. What's more, I suspect that a lot of people agree with me and love Dylan's voice but don't have the guts to admit it.

         So I don't even try to agree with the supposed "messages" of songs, assuming there are any. I think a lot of music listeners today are just like me. For many people, including many musicians, lyrics are just filler. This is ironic, since pure instrumentals are rare in popular music. The words are equally necessary and irrelevant. It's reached the point that they don't even have to vary through a song, witness techno hits like Fatboy Slim's "Rockafeller Skank" and Daft Punk's "Around the World," which feature nothing but the same words repeated over and over again.

         Even when a song expresses a political view I disagree with, I usually admire the artist for the nerve to tackle the issue. One of my favorite songs is Rage Against the Machine's "Killing in the Name." The sentiment expressed in the song is over-the-top leftist negativity that has never much appealed to me. Besides, Public Enemy's "911 is a Joke" covers similar themes, but is funnier and more clever. (And, unfortunately, inspired lots of prank calls to 911 operators.) Still, I prefer the Rage song, purely based on the musical experience of listening to it.

         Of course, I realize that my musical background inclines me to enjoy hard rock more than rap. I have respect for the hip-hop genre, but from a distance. It followed a route similar to that of rock and roll in the '50s and '60s: while first dismissed as a teenage fad, it came to be taken seriously as an artistic form of music, and its popularity endured long after many people predicted it would disappear.

         As I arrived at my teenage years, I wanted to rebel against my parents' taste. That wasn't easy to do, considering that I liked a lot of the same music that they did. They considered the Beatles the greatest group of the latter half of the twentieth century, and I could not disagree. Not only did I admire the Beatles, I very much loved their music almost as much as my parents did. What could I turn to in my generation that would separate my tastes from those of my parents? I didn't much like hip-hop, the only truly new popular genre to emerge in my generation. So I turned to hard rock and grunge, which is what a lot of my white male peers were listening to. But even after I stopped caring what music was considered cool, I continued to enjoy this new type of music, which wasn't really that new. Nirvana, for instance, isn't too far removed musically from the music my parents grew up with, certainly not in the way their music differed from that of their parents. By now, the primary difference between my tastes and my parents' is that I appreciate dark music a little more than they do.

         My taste is both broad and narrow, crossing genres and periods rather unselfconsciously. My father, after hearing one of my mix tapes, remarked that I must be the only person in the world to have the Beatles' "Yesterday" followed immediately by Cypress Hill's "Insane in the Brain." But other people who have heard my selections have noticed common patterns in the songs I like. These songs frequently have a predominance of guitars. At the same time, I hate the crooning guitar pop of the last ten years, from the Goo Goo Dolls to John Mayer. I like folk and bluegrass but not standard country music, though curiously I enjoy Southern Rock like Lynyrd Skynyrd and ZZ Top, which has strong country elements. The songs I listen to often have relatively simple melodies and much repetition, no matter what the genre.

         On the previous blackboard, someone referred to me as a female rock lover. It's strange, but I do seem to like a lot of female vocalists from the nineties, even though most of the music I like from before then is sung by males. On Pandora, I created a station which I vaguely labeled "Female Alternative," and I plugged in Fiona Apple, P.J. Harvey, No Doubt, Garbage, Sheryl Crow, Enya, and k.d. lang. This ended up being the most successful of my three stations (the other two are a "Classic Rock" station focusing on the Beatles and Bob Dylan; and a "Hard Rock" station featuring artists like Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, Korn, Faith No More, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Aerosmith, Nine Inch Nails, Ditto, Radiohead, Black Sabbath, and the White Stripes--it doesn't seem to produce music I like, perhaps because the selection is too wide, and besides, I don't necessarily like music that sounds similar to that which I do like: just because I love RATM doesn't mean I like rap-metal in general).

         Why do I like these female artists so much? No, it's not because I think they're hot or something. (You don't see me including Kelly Clarkson on the list.) Maybe what I like is the way some of these women take full advantage of their vocal abilities within genres that have traditionally been sung by men. In any case, I seem to have a fascination with music that combines heavy guitar riffs with crooning vocals, male or female. (Radiohead fits into that category as much as any of the women singers I've listed.) A lot of this music is angst-ridden, and part of what attracts me to it is the fact that I'm an angsty person.

         I found the class demonstration very interesting. I had a feeling people wouldn't guess that I was the one who chose the P.J. Harvey’s song; because they would assume a female had selected it. That was one angle we didn't talk about much--how some of us may make assumptions about people's tastes based on their gender. I wasn't surprised that a number of people linked me to the Billy Joel song. (I happen to like Billy Joel, but not that song.) Nor did I raise an eyebrow when people snickered after placing me by process of elimination with the Techno Pop record. No self-respecting male would listen to that, right? You haven't met my brother.

         Whatever music I listen to, whether it's hard or soft, rock or country or anything else, I want it to excite me. I cannot relate at all to the concept of "relaxing" music. When I listen to music I like, it has an effect similar to caffeine. I even have used it as a caffeine substitute to get me up in the morning, since I stopped having caffeine several years ago for medical reasons. But maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way. Perhaps, in some sense, the music I like does relax me. A really good song puts me at ease, and the "soothing, light" stuff they typically play on the smooth jazz stations or in elevators would tend more to put me on edge.

         For all these reasons, I believe that I do have considerable choice in the music I listen to, and that it does reflect my tastes rather than the other way around. It's true that I've until recently centered my taste largely on the stuff that gets played on radio, and you could argue that I'm really not choosing as much I think I am. But I believe that the way we handle even a limited selection of something says something about our personalities. It's the same with the way we dress: we can't just wear whatever we feel like (dressing like a Star Trek character, or like someone from the eighteenth century, wouldn't fly unless you're at a costume party), but the way we function within these limits says something about us.

"Primal Beats and More" a response to N. Barsky's "Generation Gap" by P.C. Paul
"When I was three, I loved the Beatles' "Come Together." It still is one of my favorite songs." A kindred soul. I danced to my first Beatles 45 in 63’. Haha. Plus you said "Beatles" and not Cough, cough that dirt bag band "The Rolling Stones." "Primal." I search for such beats: collect them: cherish them.

         "As I arrived at my teenage years, I wanted to rebel against my parents' taste." Try as you may sometimes some music is timeless, Beatles being one of them. It also looks like for some Pink Floyd is another. "They considered the Beatles the greatest group of the latter half of the twentieth century, and I could not disagree. Not only did I admire the Beatles, I very much loved their music almost as much as my parents did." Difficult to argue that statement. The Beatles have influenced so many many bands afterwards. Even my mother likes The Beatles except she divides right at Sergeant Peppers. I disagree with her on that, but I did notice that in my own selection, many bands I liked had a tendency to mature and change on the fourth album or so such that I didn’t agree with the change. I also found they (some groups a few albums later) would return to their old tried and true roots probably because their sales plummeted.

         "But other people who have heard my selections have noticed common patterns in the songs I like. These songs frequently have a predominance of guitars." Interesting. My early collection seemed to run through ripping electric lead guitar, synthesizer/organ Rick Wakeman/Yes/Pink Floyd/Emerson, Lake, and Palmer, King Crimson) and acoustic, wood music. It stated to expand into Genesis with Peter Gabriel and Renaissance Rock expanded out into Tangerine Dream. Southern Rock like Lynyrd Skynyrd and ZZ Top... what about Early Allman Brothers, Climax Blues Band or Charlie Daniels. I eventually fell back to basics at one point and listened to singers vocal range and lyrics.

         "On the previous blackboard, someone referred to me as a female rock lover." Girl Groups! Eeeeeh Ha! Hahahaha. There were thousands of them in the early eighties. We called them Girl Groups because most times they were all women usually just over thirty and below forty writing some of the most contagious beats and lyrics. Take a look for Hilary, Ditto, Bush Tetras, Sinéad O’Connor, Siouxsie and the Banshees and her husband "Budgie," or her "Creatures" project http://www.vamp.org/Siouxsie/Lyrics/. Songs like Switch, Arabian Knights, Happy House, Spellbound, She’s a Carnival, Slowdive is her best known, Dazzle, Candyman, Cities in Dust, 92 Degrees, Peek-a-Boo. Also Cocteau Twins. Be warned after about 10 minutes of listening to the Cocteau Twins one’s head will explode. It's a well known phenomenon recorded in PubMed. One big hit was "Carolyn's Fingers." My ex-wife never understood the appeal to this song except... it came on the car radio one day. "You can't appreciate it at that volume. Here, let me show you." I turned to volume from three to nine. "Oh, well that's very different. It's difficult to tell which is more searing: the guitar or her voice. But then again, Mountain Song by Jane's Addiction is also one of those sons that must be played the same way, but I digress.

         Yes, Alice in Chains, also try The Church, (Reptile), Nine Inch Nails (Head Like a Hole), also try Front 242 (read as Front Two Four Two).

         "Why do I like these female artists so much? Maybe what I like is the way some of these women take full advantage of their vocal abilities within genres that have traditionally been sung by men." That I would agree with. It is vocal range in many cases. Altos like Siouxsie I like to harmonize with. Sopranos like the Cocteau Twins just hit that super high sweet spot better than electric lead guitar. The only instrument that even comes close is the electric violin and the best for that is The Mahavishnu Orchestra with John McLaughlin.

         Most of the women you just viewed were NOT of the drop dead gorgeous, now were they. I would agree that part of the attraction is sound: a woman's voice, but there is something deeper. The expression of the same angst (similar energy), but completely different problems and completely different causes (causes and effects). It's not a one-way street in communications "and if you've got five seconds to spare, I'll tell you the story of MY LIFE."

         Groups like the Delta Five became "chants" the men chanting one part and the women chanting the other. Both sides could identify because neither felt that they were being heard, hence the angst. The Delta Five brought relationship arguments to the stage and it was here both sexes found, changing partners wasn't the solution. You can't fix the problem until you understand that men and women communicate differently and the only resolve is through "boundary crossing theory."

         "It's the same with the way we dress: we can't just wear whatever we feel like (dressing like a Star Trek character, or like someone from the eighteenth century, wouldn't fly unless you're at a costume party), but the way we function within these limits says something about us." Why not? After all Ministry asked, "(Why can’t everyday be) Halloween?"

A response to P.C. Paul's post by N. Barsky
A number of the '60s bands are timeless. My 15-year-old cousin's favorite bands now are the Rolling Stones and the Beatles. He's no exception: a lot of young people today like these groups. But is there any pre-rock music that has such an effect? I don't think so.

         Of course, not all the good '60's bands have endured like this. The Beach Boys were musically innovative, but their lyrics sound incredibly cheesy today, and their barbershop-quartet sound is very dated. You don't find teenagers lined up for a Brian Wilson concert.

         My parents and I agree that the Beatles' best stuff was generally their later stuff. But they weren't so consistent after they broke up. Paul took a nosedive in quality with the Wings. I've actually never been so much a fan of his music, even though he's arguably the most versatile and technically skilled musician of the four. He has an unfortunate tendency toward a smooth-jazz sound. While he did write some of the Beatles' best songs ("Eleanor Rigby," "Let It Be," etc.), there were some early signs of the route he would take as a solo artist--like "Got to Get You Into My Life." (DC 101's "Make It Stop" once played a hilariously bad cover version of that song, by a then-unknown musician named...uh, Joe Pesci.) I've always preferred Lennon's songs, and indeed his voice--the contrast between the two can be heard clearly in "A Day in the Life."

         In the case of the Beatles, they got better because they gradually gained more artistic freedom. But it isn't always true that groups get better as their artistic sensibilities mature. I used to be a big fan of Radiohead, up to OK Computer (I consider "Paranoid Android" one of the best rock songs of all time), until they gradually took a more weird, experimental turn. Some of their later albums I find unlistenable. Call me conventional, but their more traditional rock/pop songs from earlier in their career appealed to me a lot more.

         Tangerine Dream. What is it with you and oranges?

         "Devil Went Down to Georgia." That's Charlie Daniels Band. They also once did a song called "Simple Man," which has a good tune, but the sentiment expressed in the lyrics is NUTS!

         I was having a discussion with some people about whether we tend to listen more to music sung by the same sex or the opposite sex. I would say that, my obsession with '90s female artists notwithstanding, I prefer to listen to male singers. On the one hand, you could say that, for a heterosexual at least, you listen to singers of your own sex (partly) because you identify better with them, but you listen to singers of the opposite sex (partly) because of sexual attraction.

Music is a technology that we use to define ourselves and has the power to influence what we wear, how we speak and how we act. To what extent do you think this is true?
This exercise for me was fun but time consuming. As I said, I did not understand the question of private or public. I understood the question as being the disk would be thrown on and played from 0 to 30 seconds. I understood the question as say I had a public radio talk show and I chose the "staple" or "calling card" song that I chose to enter and exit with I chose something that had a long instrumental so the words would not interfere. Now if I was spinning records, well that would have been a different persona. If I was choosing to identify myself to the 324 class I would have chosen something else. If I was wooing someone, again the choices would have been different again.

My objective was to remain "true to myself" and not throw everyone for a loop, but in doing so, I STILL threw everyone for a loop. Even if I had used "Your Silent Face". I spoke about the sound of the "hollow bass" in my first ENGL 407 post, so that should have been a clue to a few people who were taking ENGL 324 and 407 at the same time as I was.

In retrospect, I was limited by technology. If I had a do-over, I would have chosen "Mind Your Own Business" because when I worked at Sears, I used to sing this among other songs and eventually earned the nickname, "Doc" shortened from "Dr. Strange," a Ph.D. in strange sounds and bizarre events. Also fitting because I had a t-shirt that said "Strange Engineering," Evenston, Ill manufacturer of race-hardened rear axles. It was NOT chosen because when this music was somewhat popular although obscure, it was difficult to find then. Eight years since this active learning activity was conducted, most of the music spoken about here is now available on You Tube because those who own the music have been willing to share it through the Internet making it all less obscure.

         Music is a technology that we use to define ourselves and has the power to influence what we wear, how we speak and how we act. Yes I fully agree. My music changed not only as times changed but also as I changed. My music ran cross many years and genres. (Does anyone have John Philip Souza in their collection?) I was a hippie-wanna-be and yes I had a full head of hair once with a pony tail half way down my back. One young woman one night was dying to put my hair in French braids and she did it such that I looked like an American Indian. Of course the music influenced everything. I wore Buffalo Frye boots and not the short ones but up to the knees, coveralls, Indian moccasins, cowboy yoke shirts in floral colors, t-shirts making ridiculous statements to the world. Who didn’t? What I did not do was anything that was permanent like body piercing or tattoos. We followed a British tradition: if it couldn’t be removed to go to a respectable job, don’t do it! We loved to speak in code and sill do flipping around music lyrics that suit the occasion or what we want to express.

         I was introduced to Punk in 1975 or 1977 when I saw this woman performer at Hofstra University. The woman we saw went by the name of "Patty Smith." I merely shook my head. I was in disbelief as my friend who talked us into going to this convert said this was the future of music. Time proved him right and me wrong. If David Bowie is the Godfather of "Glitter Rock," Neil Young the Godfather of "Grunge," then Patty Smith was the Godmother of Punk in addition to the opening of the door to All Girl Angst Groups or ARRGH Music.

         A second friend latched on to Punk and went clubbing in NYC every weekend. I saw what it was doing to his life and swore I would not follow suit. The genre evolved to Post-Punk, to Post-Punk-Pop, to Post-Punk-Progressive-Pop, to The Post-Punk-Progressive-Pop-Party (5P). All of the music was classified as new. All was classified as genre-less. It became to be known as "The New Wave," then "Alternative." I did some research for the exercise surprised to find music that was genre-less has now been placed into categories and even in places where they don’t even belong. Bush Tetras is Indie Pop (Short for “Independent”)? Really? Front 242 is I don’t even remember what they said that was but at the time it became Industrial along with Nine Inch Nails, Ministry, Controlled Bleeding (First considered "Experiential" like Laurie Anderson), the first to begin using shop tools for rhythmic beats (air compressors, electric drills on metal plates, steel hammers on steel tables, etc.,) and who can EVER forget Skinny Puppy (most people would much rather forget). I listened intently now almost 26 and holding a respectable job (1981), no long hair and becoming a little more conservative looking on the outside. Engineering school persona and all that. But when Saturday night came I would tune into the 5P. I had many tapes of 5P and it as so far on the edge people could not believe the words or the sounds and the DJ would spin it all for dance even though some was completely un-danceable and in some cases unlistenable. Bauhaus summed it all up very nicely when they came out with the album title "Press the Eject Button and Give Me the Tape." One of the groups you do recognize was the Violent Femmes because they played here for Quadmania.

         As I said in 407, we dressed the part, but things had changed. We were respectable by day and "things" by night depending how extreme you wanted to be or dared to go. It was theatrical. I liked a Zoot suit for Saturday nights. The way we distinguished ourselves from say disco was to wear converse sneakers or combat boots. Everyone had a different style. Some chose a soft option or a hard option (Pet Shop Boys). Saturday nights was made for couples. Thursdays and Fridays were for singles. Some of the women would wear all sheer willowy black similar to Lilly of the Munster’s or Morticia Addams of the Addams Family. People dressed the part of the genre of music they identified with because many different genres were played in the same place, in the same night, on the same dance floor. There were young ladies that were dolled to a tea and very stylish as Sarah was today, but to show they were "New Wave" they would wear black converse sneakers. The dress became a way of distinguishing which team you were on. The dress and the music were codes saying are you like me? We have no other way of defining ourselves or distinguishing ourselves from others, yet it also signals we are of like minds. The signals are I agree, you’re like me, or I don’t agree, stay away. Primitive man painted their bodies differently to define that they belonged to a specific clan. None of this is new.

         A club like "Spit" the persona was different. This was a trash can. No one dressed well for Spit. It was meant to be Punk and Post-punk. Guys in black cycle jackets with torn up patches of their favorite groups on them sometimes not even sewn on but pinned on as though they were War Medals. Some had sayings on them from obscure songs like "Black is What I Wear on the Outside Because Black is What I Feel On the Inside. One song the Post Punker's stated with a battle cry, the chorus would shout, "Gimmie Money, Gimmie Sex, Gimmi Food, and Cigarettes" then came the music which sounded like something out of the Night of the Living Dead. The music genres were played in sets of about three to five song at a time because when one dances like this group did, they could only dance at most for 20 minutes without passing out. The DJ would switch genres to the floor out so a different group could dance also. They would play Industrial drawing one group and after three songs suddenly switch to Reggae, or Punk to New Wave, or a Crooner to Gothic. The funny part was everyone had a good time, everyone co-existed and everyone had fun.

         People defined the music, the music defined the people. The music directed the choice of clothes against the music and the clothes permitted for designing who you were projected against the rest of the group: Uniforms. The music affected your emotions and your emotions effected the music. You cold not tell where one began and where one ended. Or as Joy Division said, "A Means to an End."

         Speaking of ends...

To this end, does technology define us, or do we define it?
Both! 50/50. Why? This is stepping out of music for a moment and swinging into Anime, in particular Ghost in the Machine. It fits because of our background reading. In this anime the AI’s (Artificial Intelligence) constantly ask, envy, and desire a "Ghost." They mean a soul. The good old tin Man syndrome. They are constantly asking people what it’s like to have a ghost; oh you’re so lucky because you have a ghost. The machines know they never die they just keep recycling the intelligence and get new parts and bodies if necessary. In essence they have a fascination with death knowing humans die. The machines want to be human.

         On the other hand, of course, the humans want to be machines. The lead (the Major) is a woman with a prosthetic body. I read an academic essay where Ghost in the machine was used and this particular woman is used and they describe some of the gains and losses. She can leap off buildings 100 stories or more without damage, but leaves a huge depression in the concrete doing so. She cannot swim because the body is so heavy she would sink like a rock. Don’t ask, I don’t know, it's never addressed, she probably doesn’t have any (sex). The only thing this still human about her is her head. Another has prosthetic eyes. They all have jack in’s and outs to jack into computers. The time is 2020. One of the people on the team has no prosthetics. I’m not clear but he may have religious beliefs that prevent him form doing so, I’m not clear on this.

In the end of the first series, the Major is assassinated with a head shot. I the first episode of the second series, the Major is revived and fully cyber. We learn that her mind was constantly downloading at a rate of three second snap shots. facilitating her revival from death. She also retains the memory of her own death and the act of dying.

         What I am clear about is the underlying discourse of where is the fine line that separates man from machine: death and maybe a soul this depends on one’s beliefs. This does become a timely discourse and this is why I have posted it even though it does not apply to music it does apply to the reading.

Feel free to also discuss the results of our experiment, and whether any of the decisions revealed in the end were surprising to you.
Let me start by first saying that many people don’t like to be analyzed. I am one of them, Shipka is another. Now having said that let me start with our co-peer, Shipka. When Carol King and Pink Floyd came on, I decided one of these was Shipka. Okay, so you’re going to say because of the time period/generation thing, right? Wrong!

         Shipka has revealed only a few things to us. One she does not dance and this she has been animate about. You can’t dance to Carol King or Pink Floyd except one version of "Lunatics." (I saw a Ska band speed this song up and I was rolling in the isles that the group even dreamt of doing a cover in the Ska genre. The dance floor ate it up!) I could associate Shipka with "Time." Shipka and I are like minds on this one. We realize time is running out, we race against the clock to make your mark on the world. I feel this pressure and feels this pressure also and has said so. Shipka is a Ph.D. and feels the pressure to "publish or perish." Shipka needs to publish if she is going to receive tenure. Shipka feels the pressure to make advancements in the field before well as a friend of mine once said, "Rest? Sleep? Who needs it! I a few years you’ll be lying around in a pine box, you can get all the rest you need then." Morbid, but true. I feel the same pressure.

         On the other hand, Shipka has also said she hates it here. She feels like a fish out of water. Shipka is home sick. I have been through this and this is not my home either. I can’t go back home. Home is New York and it has been 13 years. Time stops for no one and New York has changed as much as I have so what I remember of NY is a nostalgic distortion in my mind. If I try to return I won’t recognize it and won’t fit in there either. I don’t fit here either. Carol King’s lyrics were that of home and homesickness. These were my code words and clue and I narrowed it down to these two choices. Shipka shot from the hip and played it straight. Shipka sent out a specific message with the song choice.

         Sarah was my surprise. I had her pegged as Carol King because of her sweet feminine style of dress and her tea drinking habits. She proved to actually to be like myself. "NEVER judge a book by its cover." Think of Anne Rice. I was leaning towards Joy Division, Bauhaus, or The Smiths because these even though these groups are out of left field people judge the cover and do not know the inner private space because I let very few in. I identify with primordial beats, the hollow base guitar, well written lyrics, also crooners. I don’t play an instrument, but I sing and was in chorus and choir right though high school. I only know how to sing one way and that’s from the diaphragm, so I am Loud. I can’t sing softly, I have to belt it out. The people in the class that guessed it was me probably remember me talking about all this in a 407 post. The dead giveaway was the first few notes of the hollow base playing lead and I had mentioned how a New Order Song had influenced my writing process in writing lyrics. If I remember correctly there are 5 or 6 of us who cross over to 407.

         Naphtali threw us a curve ball and I figured a few people might. I did suspect him of throwing a curve ball because he would do it just out of good fun. We have been in two other classes and had many discussions so I know a little of Naphtali but we have never talked about music. So I wouldn’t know other than Steve and Naphtali both referred to Billy Joel lyrics in conversation but Billy Joel did not show up in these groups. We also work together so we know a little of each other outside of class.

         Brittany I suspected was on the edge but I didn’t get hers right, I guess in a way she was a loop also.

         Matt was "Cake." I pegged him easily. We’ve had two classes together and we work together. He has also said that he’s "Lazy" and the code word was in his song. I pegged him and he shot straight.

         Steve and I so far have had two classes together and work together so we too have talked outside of class. I could not peg him because music has never come up. We have had long conversations about anime and we actually figured one out that we thought was extremely semiotic but actually all the semiotics was there to throw us off base as to the superficial plot.

         The only other person I had a clue about was Erica W. because of her re-invention of the dance shoe that her music would have a solid dance beat. But I had another clue… essays. And that’s all will say.

         Everyone else would be a mystery to me. Knowing myself and knowing you can’t judge a book there was nothing for me to draw associations from. In essence, I would be performing my only athletic activity: Jumping to Conclusions.

A response to P.C. Paul's post by N. Barsky
I didn't put a whole lot of thought into my choice, partly because I didn't have much to choose from: believe it or not, I do not own many CD's. The one I used is a mix of songs I downloaded from the Internet. My objective was to buy songs I liked a lot that were rarely or never played on the radio. Stupidly, I took the song list out of the cover before class, because I wanted to further preserve the anonymity. For the curious, this is the list of songs:

         Black Crowes, "Hard to Handle"; P.J. Harvey, "The Letter"; Jewel, "Love Me, Just Leave Me Alone"; Nirvana, "Lake of Fire"; Jem, "They"; k.d. lang, "Pullin' Back the Reins"; Tori Amos, "Cornflake Girl"; Dead Kennedy's "Holiday in Cambodia"; Sheryl Crow, "Home"; Bob Dylan, "Tangled Up in Blue"; No Doubt, "Bathwater"; Aerosmith, "Pink"; Shakira, "Suerte"; REM, "Drive"; Yeah Yeah Yeahs, "Maps"; The Jacksons, "Shake Your Body Down to the Ground"; and the Scorpions, "Send Me an Angel."

         I chose PJ Harvey's song because of its obscurity. I believe it was played for a short while on the now-defunct 99.1 HFS. But I was unsurprised that nobody in the class seemed to recognize it.

A response to N. Barsky's post by P.C. Paul
“I didn't put a whole lot of thought into my choice, partly because I didn't have much to choose from: believe it or not, I do not own many CD's. The one I used is a mix of songs I downloaded from the Internet.”

         This statement about not having many CD’s I think becomes an interesting discourse in Technology. A piece of vinyl was something of substance and importance. The Album Cover Art was cherished and even sought after as Art for posting. Part of the appeal to vinyl was the term “Hunting and Collecting.” First covering the ends of the Earth to find that rare piece of vinyl. Now in some cases, we were looking for serial numbers, record labels under rare studios (Beatles under the Capital Label) then some the person on the assembly line on a particular day would be bored and instead of just writing the serial number the employee thought it was humorous to inscribe a commentary. This was the useless portion of the vinyl near the center. Morrissey singles had this all the time. The singles disappeared quickly from the market and became rarities. Also, he was a B side Baby. This is an old Rockabilly Term (Rockabilly was 1954-1957 and this is where Elvis Presley Stole his style from, Tennessee Mountains). These artists would put their best music on the B side of the record and not the A side. The A side was played but the “ear candy” was on the B side. Those who were loyal enough to an artist were rewarded because when the singles were put into a compilation record all the B sides disappeared and became the artifacts and treasures of Hunters and Collectors. Morrissey remained faithful to the genre (they call him a crooner, he calls himself “Rockabilly.”) I didn’t know what Rockabilly was but a friend I played Smiths and Morrissey recognized it right away and said, “This stuff is great! I haven’t heard Rockabilly in years. In other words Rocking Hillbilly Music. So when the singles came over to CD the cryptic messages were lost and the B sides were lost. The gain was a sound with greater separation. Things that couldn’t really be heard before came through clearer. But this does not address the Internet Download.

         The Internet download is an advancement from the stage of borrowing someone else’s CD of vinyl and putting it on tape. All we wanted was the music. With the Internet there’s nothing to hold, nothing physical other than the Flash Drive, MP3 player, or computer hard drive. You lose the cover art for one. I guess you get lyrics from some web site, but there are some very distinct advantages. One is sampling before you buy. I noticed this but with the genre I was checking out I found that knowing the music intimately, compared the sample provided, the sample was not doing justice to the song. Something like Bauhaus “She’s in Parties” has a sort of Beatle-esque introduction and ending. It starts out as nothing and then this sound sneaks up on you builds and builds and builds, then a SNAP! And so the eerie sound begins. The vision one receives is something like out of Dracula, the slow panning of the camera through the woods, full moon moments before dawn with a think mist on the ground. The sample plays the vocals and the vocals for the song are horrible, it’s the sound that climbs up your spinal cord sending a chill. The end is the same. One cord that builds and boom. I’m off track again.

         The Internet: The Internet facilitates bands that are never heard on the radio and will never be heard on the radio to be heard. Radio stations that can exist on a PC server in my or your bedroom can exist on the Internet. Could be live broadcasts could be off the hard drive. Could be music you’re collecting locally by going out and recording artists, could be heavy world wide research over the Internet. Corporate Radio Stations and Corporate Recording Studios are scared stuff. The Bands can make recording studios with a PC and a bathroom. Production and distribution can be done via the Internet. This is all Independent Stuff. This was exactly what was happening in the 80’s. All of the music was originally on Independent Record producers and recording studios. Corporate wouldn’t pay attention to these groups: labeled as a fad. Sales rose dramatically and the way we bought the stuff also changed. Corporate Record Companies now fear struck because the landscape changed overnight and they were ignoring the change. Many of the bands got signed over to Major labels, some never made it. The point here is the landscape is changing again. The Corporate Recorders are remembering their history of the 80’s and are running scared. So are the Radio Stations. They are contemplating the distribution of entertainment is changing so quickly that they may be out of business in 20 years tops. There is a second evil to this.

         The Corporate Record Companies are elitists. Another form of “gatekeepers.” As book publishers are afraid that they may lose it all to Internet Hyper Novels online, authors who continually get rejected and eventually just throw the novel up on the net like fly paper. (If it sticks to the wall we got a winner) This means that our tastes in what we listen to and what we read may change. There are certainly thoughts and sounds beyond what the Corporate world feeds us. The fear is not only that these new modes become mainstay but that the new genres become mainstay and that Corporate loses ideological control placing control back into the hands of the consumer.

         The point is that because of the technology, the landscape is changing again and the technology will change us at first, but as we become accustomed to the technology we will demand more thereby changing the technology. The technology will change us and then we will change the technology. The pattern is always the same.

         Believe it or not, if all that music was dance music (I know it is not) but if it was as one song ended and the next started, one group would leave the floor and a new group of people would come in. I would say the difference in a club was three or four songs that a particular group of people liked would be played giving them a chance to dance themselves out, then switch to give a different group of people a chance on the floor.

         I'm way off topic but here goes: That’s Eeet! (Ren of Ren & Stimpy) You jogged my memory, it had been so long forgotten.

Favorite Group/Song
The song was either “Mind Your Own Business” other was “You,” by the Delta 5. I have been searching for the lyrics because to this day no one believed me. It turns out they (record companies) have re-released the music. The problem with 79-83 was all the music was on Independent Record labels (limited/small distribution) and most bands rarely survived beyond three years because of the limited distribution. The stuff was so far out on the peripheral you couldn’t get corporate to even signing a contract.

         Here are two links describing the group and the times better if you are curious. They sum up the Delta 5 and the time period marvelously. Better then I can do justice.
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Music/Content?oid=79289

         These are two samples of the (eh, em, I use the term loosely) “music.” The beats were absolutely contagious in a mass mentality. My friends used to say that “If this stuff was played in a Mental Institution the patients would be twitching like nit wits.” The lyrics spoke to both sides of the fence (both sexes). The main difference was this period was a breath of fresh air from the 70’s. Most seventies music, one had to constantly “read between the lines to determine what the music meant to them. The post-punk genre eliminated this. Everything meant exactly what it said. It was a cold reality type of mentality, directly in your face. The best were the women because they were conduction feminine discourses. Both sexes agreed with it because we could here the social arguments between the sexes. Delta 5 was three women and two men with two bassists. The bassists often conducted the discourse.

         Actually most of the music of the time was in your face social discourses and this was one of the main reasons for the music all being played in minor cords. Now if I remember correctly the first group to do this was The Beatles in “Strawberry Fields” purely by accident. For some reason they could not get the second stanza right. They accidentally dropped down an octave in the second stanza on one of the practice tracks, got infuriated with the way the recording sessions were going and gave up. The sound engineer spliced them together giving us what we have today and accidentally created a whole new sound that would reappear in 1979 to be played by most bands of this genre through the entire 80’s.

         Listen to Mind Your Own Business.

Mind Your Own Business
(All the women sing in harmony)
Can I have a taste of your ice cream?
Can I lick the crumbs from your table?
Can I interfere in your crisis?
No! Mind your own business.
No! Mind your own business.

This first stanza was recited as a chorus by the women.
The second stanza was done similar to row row row your boat (I forgot the musical term for this):
Women 1: Can I interfere in your crisis?" Women 2: "Can I have a taste of your ice cream?” Women 1: “No! Mind your own business." Women 2: “Can I lick the crumbs from your table?” Women 1: “No Mind your own business.” Women 2: Can I interfere in your crisis?" Women All:
No! Mind your own business.
No! Mind your own business.

(If you go out to the sound bite this will make more sense and this is about as semiotic as it gets)

This was actually funny to my sensibilities:
One because the arguments were all to familiar with my ex-wife.

Two, a night club full of men and women reacting to the same sound couldn’t all be wrong, could they?

Three, I actually had this happen to me one time in Wo Hop’s Chinese restaurant in the basement down in NYC Chinatown. It’s the best of the Chinese food in Chinatown I may add, the basement not the ground floor. Anyway, you sit elbow to elbow in this tiny restaurant that hasn’t had its décor changed since 1948. Not only your group of people but everyone else being served. This woman not part of our group started asking us all kinds of questions when our food came out. “Ooooh what’s that, and what’s that, and that. What does it taste like.” We were tempted to tell her “Why don’t you just pull up your chair, plate and fork and dig in” in a meaningful NY sarcastic tone but we were afraid she wouldn’t understand the sarcasm in our voices and would have taken us up on the offer literally.

The other song that was second or just as popular as “Mind your Own Business" was “You.” (No sample for this but easier to follow)

You
Who forgot to phone last Tuesday? You.
Who took me to Wimpy's for a big night out? You.
Who keeps me out when I want to go home? You.
Who only likes sex on Sundays? You, you, you.

You could just hear the girlfriend/boyfriend arguments loud and clear. There wasn’t anyone in the room who couldn’t identify with the argument being presented in the music.

Additional Literacies/Technological Influences from the NY Club Scene:
Malibu Night Club, Malibu Night Club in Newsday, and Long Island Night Club Scene/WLIR.FM, WDRE.FM Music Literacy.

         I agree and disagree with this comment that music is a huge influence. Personally in regards to myself, music does not define me at all. I like what I like and it is all for different reasons; therefore, music never played a part in my selection. Now don't get me wrong, when I was younger I can clearly remember wanting anything that had Michael Jackson or Prince on it. My sister and I had so many posters of various artists all over our walls that it was crazy. That is part of growing up and maturity. As an adult majority of the music I listen to is in the car on route and I seldom get to see the fashion trends unless it is worn on someone out and about. I do have some music that appeals more to me than other kinds but my mood really depends on what gets played at what time. I listen to the radio quite often and if I like something I here then I am more like to purchase it. Amazing.

         I do have quite a few music selections that people would not believe I have yet that is me and I am very versatile. My music usually will range from Neoclassic-Soul to Jazz to R&B to Rock to Classical to Hip Hop to House to Techno to Old School whatever floats my boat. If I like it, I like it. I looking at my son though, he loves music and I see him going though my Michael Jackson phase with current artist that are out there yet I always introduce him to other music. I can even see him rolling his eyes like I did with my mother when she tortured me with her music. Amazing.

         I would overall hope that technology doesn't define us and I could have probably said that years ago but in today's society it has really become a part of daily life to even function and in many ways it controls us. For example, I can remember leaving out the house and forgetting my cell phone and having to go all the way back to get it and if I was too far to go back, I felt naked all day long as if I had left my purse or something major yet there was a point of time in my life that I would not have gave the cell phone a second thought. I could only imagine what the future will have for technology. Amazing.

Response to Y. Martin's "Amazing" by N. Barsky
Despite what I said about having similar tastes to my parents, I have had the experience of being "tortured" by my parents' music. Once upon a time, there was an oldies station in Baltimore called 105.7 WQSR. On Sunday night, which is when we frequently returned from visiting my grandparents out of state, they had this show hosted by Alan Lee, where he would play forgotten fifties music. There was a lot of doo-wop, and the kind of songs where a baritone guy chants "di-di-di-dip-dip-dip-dip-dip...." Sitting in the back seat for hours with no choice but to hear this tripe, I wanted to stick a pillow in my ears.

A response to N. Barsky's post by P.C. Paul
I feel your pain. I worked with a man for a time period five years younger than myself who listened to nothing but "Doo-wop." I couldn't stand Mo-Town at the time either but have developed an "acceptance/tolerance" for it considering I could be terrorized with "Rap."

         Doo-wop was my brother and sister's time and they don't even listen to it. They were into 60's and I think they don't even bother with that anymore.

A response to Y. Martin's "Amazing" by P.C. Paul
I think you said at you are an artist and that technology does not define you. Maybe the word "define" is the problem and that technology "forms" us and we "form" technology. Art in itself is a technology and a literacy. I come from a family of artists and bucked the family line at age twelve by go in a direction.

         My father was formally trained as an artist and was employed as a commercial artist. My mother was a creative artist. It was a different time so she stayed at home raising a family. Typically an artist has a plan of something in their mind and goes out seeking a material to "relieve" the form in their mind. The artist has chosen what they want to be relieved from that material but the material also creates parameters in which the artist must function.

         My father and mother preferred painting and this was because they liked the "flow" of the paint. But they had a difference. My father preferred working with oil paint and my mother preferred working with acrylic paint. Both are paint but flow differently. The two types of paint will also dictate the textures on the canvas. Even though each had a preference in the type of paint they worked with, the paint also acted upon them in what they could express on the canvas. As artists, they formed the technology by their preferences or in other words, not how they defined themselves but the technology, the paint also formed them making allowances for what they could do and not do.

         I can’t stand working with or in paint and prefer pencil, charcoal, ink, crayon, oil pastels, and pastels. I don’t like the flow of paint and prefer all the dry stuff. Someone may say that it is in agreement with my personality, a dry personality, which may be true therefore my attraction to dry materials. I find I can control them better than paint. But because I prefer working with these materials, the technology also forms me and what I can draw and not draw. I am in no way saying that I am an artist. Understanding art obviously is not the same as being an artist, nor being artistic is the same as being an artist. I can’t pretend to even match the quality of a true artist. I stopped way too soon in my training and never really stuck with it for many years so I do not have the countless hours of practice nor the training. I do believe that this does become a 50/50 between the person and the technology.

         If we remember in the reading of Petroski he discussed the simple tool of the hammer and that it was a technology. The hammer had a wooden handle, which was not ergonomic so the craftsman had to form or conform to using the tool. With time and use, the handle would wear forming or conforming to the craftsman’s hand. Therefore the craftsman has conformed to the technology but the technology has also conformed to the craftsman.

         I thought the activity we did on Thursday was very interesting in that many people's taste in music was surprising to me. I know that most people really didn't guess that I was the person who listened to Staind, but the activity just goes to show you that, as Yolanda said, you can't judge a book by its cover.

         Now, onto the question about whether or not I choose my music based on my interests or does my music define my interests, I would honestly have to say that my interests define my music. My two favorite artists are Staind and Kelly Clarkson. I bet no one would have ever guessed that! Basically, I have grown up loving Staind; I was drawn to Aaron Lewis' voice from the beginning which is why I love them so much. And Kelly Clarkson I have loved ever since the first season of American Idol because I think she has one of the best voices I have ever heard. So I have pretty much chosen my music based upon personal preference, music has not chosen me. But, at the same time, I do believe there are times when music defines a person's interests. I have met people that are hard-core fans of an artist and they will do things similar and dress similar to that person just because they like them so much.

         After careful thought I would have say that overall we define technology. Without people, technology would be nothing but random things with no purpose. Technology relies on us to give it a purpose, not the other way around. If technology defined us then technology would have to create humans, not humans creating technology.

         But again, people have their own definition of technology: therefore, who am I to say whether or not technology defines us or the other way around. I think the real answer to this question lies in the hands of actual individuals.

         That brings me to the question, "Does technology define us, or do we define technology?" I think that we define technology in the way that we are able to choose what we listen to. I do think that the assignment may have gone a different way if the task was to pick our favorite song. This could have represented people a little more. It will be interesting to see if this is true.

         Growing up, the only real music I was exposed to was the Oldies, because that’s what my parents always played in the car. At times I would hear more modern stuff, what comes to mind right now is Michael Jackson from the ‘Dangerous’ album. My dad listened to a lot of 90’s stuff too. He introduced me to bands like the Spin Doctors. If you know who they are, then you’re cool in my book. In elementary school, I started to buy cassette tapes, like Ace of Base’s “The Sign.” One Christmas morning, I was surprised with my very own boom box, and a box of CD’s. These CD's included Green Day’s “Insomniac” and a bunch of billboard top hits of each decade from different years in the 60’s and one from 1984 because that was the year I was born. My parents chose this music for me—they gave me what they liked to listen to and what they thought I liked too (I do like the Oldies, but I don’t listen to them on a regular basis. And Green Day is alright, but I’ve never really been that big of a fan). Now that I had a CD player, I began to buy CD's. I believe I started out buying a lot of soundtracks. I also started listening to the radio, flipping through the stations until I found stuff that sounded good to me. I also watched music videos on MTV and VH1 (back when they played music videos). Based on the stuff that I liked, I would sometimes buy those CDs. I have since then racked up quite a collection of CD's. I also have a large playlist of MP3's that I have downloaded from the internet, despite the controversy with file sharing. Some of my CD's actually belong to my dad, but I’ve taken them little by little over the years, because he never listens to them.

         If you were to look at my music collection you may be surprised at the variety of music. I’m an eclectic. I listen to most everything. There are certain genres that I am not particularly fond of, but I confess that there must exist at least one song in every genre that I would like if I heard it. I am almost certain of that! I listen to whatever sounds good to me, and that’s what I like. I have a quote: “I like what I like because I like it.” There’s no need to explain why I like a song—I just do! Or I don’t like it. I hear it and my brain interprets it and makes a judgment. It’s as simple as that. I listen to everything from classical music to show tunes to country to pop to R&B to Rap to rock to metal and so on--from Beethoven to Mudvayne. But I don’t like to think that the music I listen to completely defines me, nor is it necessarily the other way around. I choose my clothes the same way I choose my music. I see what is out there and I decide what I like and that’s what I buy and wear. If I see someone wearing something that I like, I might go out and get the same thing, but not because I am trying to be like that person, but because I like the clothes and I want to wear them too.

         Now, to answer the question of whether or not I choose technology or does technology choose me, I don’t think that can really be answered. I think that technology presents itself and sometimes we have the option to say “Okay” to it, but other times, there is no choice. We may not care or we could, like if there is a change in technology that we didn’t want, but we don’t make that decision—I guess we just have to live with it. Sometimes, whether we like the change or not, it works out (i.e. toilets, electricity, etc.). And with some changes, once they are made, it is only a matter of time before people forget that the change even happened, wanted or not (i.e. VHS to DVD).

         The presentation went fairly well on Thursday. I was pleased overall. The minor technical difficulties were a shame, but they didn’t hinder things too much. I wish that we could have had more time so that all the songs could have been played in their entirety. I think that we opened up a discussion on an issue that is so huge that one class could not do it justice, nor could a blackboard post. I don’t even think a semester-long course could do the job all the way. We all have our own opinion of whether or not we can be defined accurately by the types of music we listen too. I think some of us can. Others are not so easy to see. Take my song, for instance. I chose Switchfoot’s “Chem 6A” to play on Thursday. Here are the lyrics:

         These lyrics are good if you want to define something about me. I am lazy and I don’t want to work, I want to play. I would rather watch a movie than read a book. That’s all true about me. It is also a good theme song because I think it represents a lot of the youth of America. Confused, stressed, and seeking acceptance. Now, these things are true about me, but I am also the opposite. There are other songs that could just as easily be my theme song. I thought of a few other songs before I went with Switchfoot. I was going to bring in “Open Your Heart” from the Sonic Adventure soundtrack. That’s a great song, and it reflects my determined side. I thought about Jump Little Children’s “My Guitar” because I love to play the guitar. I was considering Rufus Wainwright’s “Instant Pleasure,” but I really don’t feel strongly about the first line, however, it would have been great to play it in class (“I don’t want somebody to love me. Just give me sex whenever I want, ‘cause all I ask for is instant pleasure, instant pleasure, instant pleasure). I think that what does apply in that song is the whole “Fast Food Nation” thing—I want what I want right now! I thought about a few other songs too, like Nickelback’s “Leader of Men” (NOT to be confused with Joy Division's "Leaders of Men" and Weezer’s “Perfect Situation.” I actually brought two other CDs with me on Thursday, just in case I changed my mind at the last minute. One of the CD's was The Verve’s “Bittersweet Symphony,” which I think is a great theme song for pretty much anyone. The music is really perfect and beautiful, and the lyrics are so honest about life: “'Cause it's a bittersweet symphony, this life. Trying to make ends meet, you're a slave to money then you die.” The other CD was a single that my friend and I recorded on our own. He actually wrote the song, but I relate to it just as much. I decided against it because I wanted to avoid the embarrassment of having everyone hear me sing a stupid little “loser” song. It’s actually a very catching and clever tune, but anyway, I decided to go with “Chem 6A” in the end.

         The majority of the class guessed that that song was mine and that goes to show that I keep my life an open book so people can tell what my them song is. If I would have chosen any of the others I mentioned, would anyone have guessed correctly? I could have shocked everyone with some hardcore gangsta rap song—could you imagine that? But I think it is important to say that music is powerful and a song is never the same twice. We interpret every song differently when we listen to it at different times. Depending on our mood, a song can sound different or even mean something that we didn’t think it meant before. We notice new things in the lyrics and in the music. It’s really quite profound.

         On a final note, I would also like to say that many of us, if not all of us, have music that we listen to that we don’t let other people know about. We are closet fans of certain artists and if people knew that we listened to that, they would probably hold it against us and make fun of us. What would you think about me if I told you that I listen to Disney songs, Kelly Clarkson, The Spice Girls, and let’s see, what’s another good one?... how about Wang Chung? Yeah, well, you’d probably be surprised. Do I listen to those artists? I don’t know, you tell me. Can you tell by the way I talk or the way I dress? Can you tell by the way I write or by the possessions I carry with me? Maybe. Maybe not. Without going on to my Facebook or MySpace profiles, could you determine what artists I actually listen to just by what you do know about me? And for those of you that will look up my profiles, I will admit that the list I give on those sites is just a sample of the stuff I listen to the most. Take my challenge if you wish.

         I think this is the longest Blackboard post I’ve ever done.

"Long Posts Lead to Longer Posts"a response to M.J. Bowen's "Music: The universal language" by P.C. Paul
“I believe that there are three kinds of people: there are conformists, non-conformists, and people who do what they want. I would say that a very small percentage of people are actually part of the third group. You may disagree, and I’m not trying to offend. I like to consider myself a part of that group.”

         Interesting point in as much as we like to consider ourselves so different from each other psychology does the same thing and narrows us down to very few groups. I care not attempt to redefine or expand your categories because they do work neatly for the moment.

         Conformists (Status Quo), but this group likes to blend, they don’t want to stand out. There is a sense of comfort in following the tried and true. Remaining inside one box is less stressful than box jumping because each new box presents new affordances but also new limitations from the old box. By remaining within the same box one doesn’t have to re-explore the landscape once again. Then there are others who become bored or desire constant stimulation; therefore, they are constantly box jumping.

         People who do what they want. Seems to suggest that these people fluctuate in between the above and below extremes sort of like a sine or cosine wave (depending if one chooses to start at 0 or 1) but I would like to think that these people do not fluctuate or cycle between the two extremes in such a steady state as such a wave. I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt of being a little less predictable.

         This person or persons let’s say that for some reason it was the rage to wear red Nike shoes because … I am abandoning this because I see something and it really doesn’t help me. I follow your point but it isn’t working very well for me.

         Non-conformist (Revolutionaries/Anarchists), this group I like to think in the end would eventually rebel rebellion. They are usually on the bleeding-edge of everything. I say they would eventually rebel rebellion because no matter what something is they will rebel even when that something becomes exactly in their favor or becomes conformity. They do tend to stand out as a bullet eye (target) in a crowd. This I think is a smaller portion of the group of the population. They tend to be anti-social or “anti-socialists” but in doing so form their own social order so they are not truly “anti-socialists.” They just can’t stand conformity of any sort. I was going to use Red Nike, but that isn’t working. Army Boots, no better, the Viet Nam era “Jungle Boots” which were some black leather and olive green canvas. That’s really ugly. They are so ugly that no one would wear them and they were cheap and readily available. It becomes a symbol or a uniform of sorts. But let’s say for the sake of argument it was discovered that they were comfortable (though they are not). The word gets around, the people who do what they want begin buying “jungle boots” not necessarily to be associated with the Non-Conformist but because they have learned that they are cheap and comfortable. The fad continues to grow and starts to become less or a fad. Demand is exceeding supply and the word is getting out further that “jungle boots are comfortable, cool in the summertime, provide years of wear. And more people are wearing them. Now the style of wearing jungle boots is moving towards conformity because many people are wearing them and not just a select few. Only the hard core conformist will continue to wear “penny loafers” (that could be a generational word or a regional word, not sure) because they not only find “penny loafers” comfortable but because their parents wore penny loafers and their parents wore penny loafers, etc.

         Now you can see why I wanted to abandon this whole line of reasoning because it really doesn’t sound like a solid argument.

         “He introduced me to bands like the Spin Doctors. If you know who they are, then you’re cool in my book.”

         Yes I do know who they are so thank you. They had one hit, was it “Girlfriend?” can’t remember but it had a funk sound to it that was upbeat and lively.

         “My parents chose this music for me—they gave me what they liked to listen to and what they thought I liked too (I do like the Oldies, but I don’t listen to them on a regular basis. And Green Day is alright, but I’ve never really been that big of a fan).”

         A few things here, since WWII, I think there has been an increase in the amount of free time people have because of the advances in technology and also what is happening believe it or not, each generation, those who can, are getting higher educations, receiving bigger salaries, therefore more disposable cash. Plus, I think that there is becoming a greater blending of cultures and ethnicity which then introduces one’s culture to another. There no doubt that music in some ways identifies a culture especially ethnic music. I think this becomes an exponential factor in one’s music tastes. The more music that is in the home environment and the more one is surrounded by from other’s homes I think created a greater openness to varying types of music. I don’t know if anyone uses this term anymore, but some would say, “If it’s got a beat, throw it on the wheels of steel (the turntable).” It should be apparently obvious what this statement meant.

         “Now that I had a CD player, I began to buy CD's. I believe I started out buying a lot of soundtracks. I also started listening to the radio, flipping through the stations until I found stuff that sounded good to me.” This is usually the way it begins, but again I would argue that this is because since WWII we and next generations will have more disposable cash. This was not true of my parents who were Depression Babies” when very little was available and daily survival was most important then only to be thrust into a World War where every commodity was in short supply to support the war effort. I can’t account for music in my household until probably the mid-fifties and this was because of more leisure time and more disposable cash parents, brother and sister alike. Flipping through stations I think is a curiosity of children and being human. Kind of like Dee-Dee in Dexter’s Laboratory, “Ooooooh, what does this button do!” We just can’t resist tinkering with things and then one begins to make discoveries like there are different types of music out there.

         Cruising the dial is how I found genuine Jamaican Reggae. I taped 1000's of hours of it and played it at work. A Jamaican office cleaner overheard it one evening and asked me if that was live? I.E. was that on the radio now. He recognized the True Jamaican sound and artists. He couldn't believe his ears and we had a long conversation about Jamaica, Jamaican Politics, Food, and of course music.

         Earlier I mentioned "5P" (The Post Progressive Punk Pop Party) and the music played here was owned by Jeff Foss, the radio host. All the vinyl he collected within SoHo, NYC or it was mailed to him by artists. All this music was played in the Underground NYC music scene and little ever made it to so called mainstream (the left of the dial.) Right of the dial was true corporate music/mainstream consumption stuff.

         “I also watched music videos on MTV and VH1 (back when they played music videos). Based on the stuff that I liked, I would sometimes buy those CDs. I have since then racked up quite a collection of CD's.” This is fascinating. You grew up with MTV, I did not. The record companies and even as radio listeners were a little hesitant to MTV. The argument presented in “Video Killed the Radio Star” is obvious. The thought was we would not visualize music anymore. As the music plays the sounds, the lyrics, the voices carry us on our own journeys regardless of the artist’s intent (Thinking about an Antarctic expedition while listening to Reggae. Is that possible?) Anyway, the thought was that the video would cause the consumer to think “only” the thoughts that were presented in the video and no other. Record companies were afraid that consumers would buy less music and watch more MTV for free and we as consumers thought we would buy less music because we were concentrating more on the video and less on the sound. It turned out that both camps were wrong and the technology molded us. We bought even more music and then started buying videos. What happened is the video was only one interpretation of the song. We never allowed the video to rule our imaginations. The technology formed us but we also formed the technology by demanding more elaborate videos, like Michael Jackson’s “Thriller.” A real peculiar one was the use of wild animals running across open planes being played to the song “It’s My Life” by Talk Talk. That message was loud and clear. Animal Activism and Animal Rights? Wrong! The lines across his mouth was an argument against "lip syncing" to music recording in live performances. Boy was this video ever a mis-communication. But then again, I would never want to see a video for "Teenage Enema Nurses in Bondage" by Killer Pussy.

         On the other hand, sometimes the video showed us what the artist meant with the lyrics and the sound. Sometimes things we were better off not knowing. Such as a certain song by Front 242, I forgot the name now, was about vertigo and suicide. They would repeat the action of the ground spinning and approaching the viewer as though one leaped from a building. Nice. Another, again I don’t remember the name of the song, but within the same genre was Nine Inch Nails. I can’t explain the video easily because there are way too many symbols but the video reeked of pro-heroin messages. Those uninitiated would think that it was just another video being ghoulish.

         “I have a quote: “I like what I like because I like it.” There’s no need to explain why I like a song—I just do! Or I don’t like it. I hear it and my brain interprets it and makes a judgment. It’s as simple as that.” I would like to take this a step further, even though I am not a musician and cannot play an instrument; I did sing and did vocals. I cannot listen to music and do homework at the same time. The reason is I “read” music even though I can’t read sheet music. My mind will focus on an instrument I like in the particular piece (it’s not always the same instrument in all music), could be lead guitar, could be rhythm, beat, base, piano, organ or any other instrument, could be a riff, or a cord, a sound or a mix of sounds. It could be lyrics, the singer’s vocal range or lack thereof. Could be that in the case of a woman I might find that her range is so narrow and her voice so close to mine it is easy to harmonize against her voice. There are an infinite possibilities but my mind interprets music as you said, “as a language.” Some people I have known who were musicians said that, “I just never tried enough instruments to find one that worked with me and that I could work with, i.e. me forming technology and technology forming me.”

         “Now, these things are true about me, but I am also the opposite. There are other songs that could just as easily be my theme song. I thought of a few other songs before I went with Switchfoot.” As we discussed, I myself spend a great deal of time making a selection. I found that I had to work within a frame such as a 30 second time slot, and assumed it would be played from 0 to seconds. Some songs especially dance tracks it can take seven seconds for even a first note to be played other than a beat. Other times I had to be careful of the message being delivered so as not to alienate because I assumed if it was a theme song it wound be a public message. The one I chose had a really terrible title but had a modern upbeat sound to it without words. Many people find words and voices to be more berating than just instrumentals. Also it provides one space especially in radio and TV to talk over the music. I had narrowed down the selection to four songs. One had immediate lyrics but was rather sassy with a sharp message which was really not the message I wanted to send. Second became way too moody because of the symphonic orchestra synthesizer, and the third clearly identified me with its primordial beats, but would throw everyone for a loop. My calling card was the hollow base because I talked about it in 407 and a few people might have said, “Ohhhhh, so that was what he meant by the sound of the hollow base.” That was the gimmie. I tried to shoot from the hip as best I could with what little I had.

         “Lazy” was the code word, but I would say probably more like “laid back and open-minded” might better describe some of your personality which creates a certain sense of openness with you and that also sets up some expectations of predictability. You put a message out and that message was picked up by more than a few people, which meant that you shot straight from the hip. There was little space for interpretation. It’s nice sometimes not to have to interpret everything.

         “The majority of the class guessed that that song was mine and that goes to show that I keep my life an open book so people can tell what my them song is.” That seems so and it does open a space for greater range of possibilities and many different avenues throughout your life. Again, we mold technology and technology molds us.

         “I think it is important to say that music is powerful and a song is never the same twice. We interpret every song differently when we listen to it at different times. Depending on our mood, a song can sound different or even mean something that we didn’t think it meant before. We notice new things in the lyrics and in the music. It’s really quire profound.” Yes! Others definitely have disagreed. I agree in the sense that if the lyrics are open enough, just as a poem or a good novel, it provides enough space for a wide variety of people to move in and live there for a few months. What? It provides a space that is not always interpreted the same way every time. The difference between a “closed-space” and an “open-space.” Other songs are predictable and I think we will use them to express or release emotion or energy in a healthy was even if the energy or emotion itself is or is not healthy.

         “On a final note, I would also like to say that many of us, if not all of us, have music that we listen to that we don’t let other people know about.” That was true of a whole genre of music I was listening to. Naphtali triggered the name of group I completely forgot about, the Delta 5. For years I was searching for a lyrics site and for the music because it was something no one would ever believe. Once Naphtali triggered the group name I did a search and lo and behold, the recording industry January, 2006 did a re-release of all their long lost and I do mean lost singles. For me, it worked a little differently. I didn’t play it for people. I didn’t want to subject anyone to something they REALLY didn’t want to listen to. On the other hand, I always welcomed the adventurous type into my music collection. Someone who would rummage through as though they were in a record store, pull something out and ask to hear it. I probably would have said, “Do you know what it is?” hoping they would say, “No, but I want to hear it anyway, I want to hear what YOU listen to.” The music was always lying there like an open book waiting for a reader. It’s a shame no one ever decided to read the book. I think they are all still waiting for the movie version.

         Personally, I am influenced by everyone around me, and the things I do in my everyday life. I haven’t become my music, but I listen to my music because of who I am. I have roommates who have totally different musical tastes than me and I hear their songs playing and I say, “Hey, who is this? I want to download this.” Or my friends’ away messages with these awesome lyrics, I google them and BAM it’s my new favorite song. I also had a sudden loss in my life and from that, turned to these mourning songs and songs about sadness and totally depressing music. As a human, I am this 20-year-old girl with so many different and complex emotions, and if you were to look through my itunes, you would see this. For example, I will list the five most played songs on itunes:

1. < href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj3ibm95zzc" target="new window">In The Sun by Michael Stipe and Coldplay (44 times)
2. Finale B from Rent (27)
3. Little Miss Can’t Be Wrong by The Spin Doctors (25)
4. I’m Yours by Jason Mraz (22)
5. < ahref="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWhkbDMISl8" target="new window">Hanging on the Telephone by Blondie (21)

         Other artists down the list include Eminem, Postal Service, Yellowcard, Ashlee Simpson, among others. I mean, what does this say about me? I am all over the place in genres, style, and content.

         Like I said in class, because of our environment I chose Jock Jams “Let’s Get Ready to Rumble.” Shipka said maybe I was trying to help you guys out, and maybe I was. I don’t know why I picked it. I get ready to it when I go out. I have a playlist called “Let’s Go Out” and there are only four songs on it, and that’s one of them. I could have picked others, but when the group said “theme song,” like something to walk out to, I totally had “llllettt’s get ready to rummmbllleeeeee” in my head.

         In response to others’ picks. I wasn’t surprised by all of them. I guessed a lot of them correctly, just from listening to them in class and having some of the people in some of my other classes; I guess it was sort of easy to guess. I know Ashley Reed outside of class so I knew her pick would be some sort of slow jam like she used to listen to. When OAR came on I assumed it was Kelly’s by the way the band is and their target audience. Others did surprise me, especially from group B. I really didn't know what to do about them. Shipka and Holly surprised me, and I hope I didn’t offend either of you when I mentioned age being a factor, because I do know that music spans across all barriers, including race, ethnicity, gender, and age. Holly, I almost picked the Eagles version of “Peaceful Easy Feeling,” what a good song. That was long; I hope I didn’t bore you guys.

A response to E. Berman's "Music Makes the People Come Togetherrrr" by P.C. Paul
“Personally, I am influenced by everyone around me, and the things I do in my everyday life. I haven’t become my music, but I listen to my music because of who I am. I have roommates who have totally different musical tastes than me and I hear their songs playing and I say, “Hey, who is this? I want to download this.” Or my friends’ away messages with these awesome lyrics, I Google them and BAM it’s my new favorite song.”

         This is quite true but also you do influence others around you and things you do in everyday life. I don’t mean to sound preachy but this is the focus of mindfulness. Understanding that we and everything around us is part of a system and that every choice and action we make causes someone else to act or react, regardless of positive or negative. So where you may “think” you have so little power, something you may have said or did/done, even through music/technology may have/had a profound influence upon someone else even if they never say so or the influence is not realized until years later when both have long parted their ways.

         For example, I will list the five most played songs on itunes:
         5.Hanging on the Telephone by Blondie (21)

         “Blondie” Who knew? So evidently something Blondie said or her lyrics or the emotion in her voice spanned across generations. I saw Blondie appear in her big comeback as a warm up for Tears For Fears second and last tour together. Tears For Fears together did not like touring and were perfectionists so albums spanned long periods of time. “Blondie” was a legend from my time, but I never saw her. I saw her on a comeback and knew we were similar in age, yet after hearing her as a non-drugged up mature woman it was fascinating because her emotion still came through in her vocals. I still don’t consider her one of the best, but after seeing her and hearing her on stage I could open my mind to understand why she became a legend.

“For example, I will list the five most played songs on itunes: 1.In The Sun by Michael Stipe and Coldplay (44 times)
2.Finale B from Rent (27)
3.Little Miss Can’t Be Wrong by The Spin Doctors (25)
4.I’m Yours by Jason Mraz (22)
5.Hanging on the Telephone by Blondie (21)
Other artists down the list include Eminem, Postal Service, Yellowcard, Ashlee Simpson, among others. I mean, what does this say about me? I am all over the place in genres, style, and content.

         See some of my post with Matt. One thing I think it has to do with is disposable cash. Second I think it has to do with greater mixing of cultures and ethnicities a sense of widening horizons and open-mindedness. This I believe has been expanding with each new generation. Ah, that’s it. I didn’t mention it to Matt but I did mention it to Naphtali and that has to do with technology and distribution of music. It is becoming more accessible and not restricted to just AM/FM airplay. For me the places for exploration was someone else’s record collection, finding a college radio station and then eventually the night clubs changed their style and because a new avenue to get music played no one ever heard. Once this happened, people of this mindset would only flock to clubs that WOULD dare to play unheard of music instead of old tried and true. Of course this sets up a competition if the clientele no longer frequents your place. It took the club owners a little work but they soon discovered the secret was not in playing the same new stuff being played in the other club but to go out and just break virgin shrink wrap. In other words, walk in by records, unheard unopened and just play them. Of course this became the job of the DJ, to hunt music all week, find what had similar sounds and learn how to weave the sound from one piece of vinyl finishing to one being brought in. Those who could do it well, did their homework and could introduce the newest music brought in the crowds. Once again the technology is changing the distribution of music and how it receives airplay via the Internet.

A response by M.J. Bowen to E. Berman's "Music Makes the People Come Togetherrrr
You are awesome because you listen to the Spin Doctors. And I have a personal goal of putting "Little Miss Can't-be-Wrong" into another rock n roll song.

         Pandora allows you to create your own radio stations that are customized to your tastes. You type in an artist or a song, and it then plays songs with similar musical qualities. The musical qualities include terms like "extensive vamping," "minor key tonality," "acoustic rhythm guitars," "dynamic male vocalist," "electronica influences," and so on. If you choose an artist, the station will play several songs by that artist. If you choose a specific song, for legal reasons it won't just go and play that song for you right way, but it might do it eventually, after playing several other songs. You're allowed to skip about ten songs per hour on a particular station, though if you switch between two stations, you can skip endlessly. Therefore, it's sometimes possible to manipulate the program so that it plays a particular song you want to hear--but this doesn't always work. Pandora doesn't have every song in the world (though it does have quite a lot), and if it doesn't play the song you requested after a long while, I suspect it probably doesn't have the song, even if it claims to recognize it.

         You can add as many artists or songs to a station as you want, so that the station gradually becomes customized to your tastes. And after any song it plays, you can tell it whether you liked or disliked the song--thus further customizing the station. Pandora claims to be part of an experiment called the Music Genome Project, designed to study the attributes behind people's musical tastes. Personally, I suspect the website is just a plug for Indie artists. Already, I have gotten interested in about a half dozen artists I never heard of before.

         I have to say though that music isn’t necessarily a huge part of my life. I know it sounds strange, as a 20 year old in college music is usually a major factor in most social lives of people I know. I don’t buy CD’s (or download, much) of new music that comes out, and I’ve only been to one concert in my life, which was Bon Jovi back in high school, and I had to buy a ticket for my sister in order to be allowed to go. I like music, but I’ll download or buy certain songs and play them over and over again, listening to the same CD’s for years and never buying new ones. It’s not that I don’t like it, but I like certain things and see no reason to change what I listen to. I’d rather listen to a new artist of the radio, then wait a few years to see if they’re still around before I buy their CD. If they’re still around, I’ll know they aren’t just a one-hit-wonder and it would be worth my money to buy it. In this way, it would be hard to say that the music I listen to defines myself in terms of what I wear and how I speak. There are certain genres that as a whole I don’t like, with a few exceptions when the mood strikes me, but I’ll listen to pretty much anything. Grunge, Alternative, old-school rock, 80’s hair bands, and 60’s folk music all appeal to me in different ways.

         There is one distinct example in which I would say that it is not generally true that my music does not define me. Since 2nd grade, I have played the viola in the school orchestra. In middle school I got involved with outside symphonies and competitions, and in high school I once played with the BSO. Now, I don’t like classical for the most part, but part of the reason for this is that the viola parts in most traditional pieces tend to suck. But I would consider myself a classical musician, and most of my friends and hobbies at the time revolved around music and these activities. I’ve since diversified my interests since the community orchestra at UMBC didn’t appeal to me.

         So I’m not sure if this means that technology defines me or I define it. I like music, I get bored when I’m doing homework and listen to it, but listening to music isn’t an integral part of my life. However, I couldn’t imagine who I would be if it weren’t for my experience playing it. I suppose to a certain extent it is reflected in my personality, and I noticed no one was surprised by the results of the experiment and got it right on the first try, in my case at least. I wonder what would have happened if I had gone with my other choice “Always a Woman,” by Billy Joel. People tend to think of him as an older artist, so would it have changed people’s minds? At the moment my favorite song is “La Vie Boheme,” from the movie version of Rent, but that will probably change tomorrow.

"Is It Really so Strange" a response to N. Horstman's "She's Always a Woman..." by P.C. Paul
“While it might seem a strange source of inspiration, I’d say that a lot of my music choices were influenced largely in part by my 26 year old sister…” This is not strange at all. My introduction to music was a 7” 45 rpm, Beatles, probably “I Want to Hold Your Hand” by my much older sister. From there I was introduced to Peter, Paul and Mary (who?) folk singers/protest music “I thought that if you had An acoustic guitar then it meant that you were A Protest Singer Oh, I can smile about it now But at the time it was terrible” (Group: The Smiths Song: Shakespeare’s Sister) (That is odd.) after my brother married, probably 2 years later a box of 59’ to 63’ 45’s were left behind which neither my younger sister or I bothered with until I was about 10. It was left behind because most of it was the crap from the time, so it didn’t hold our interest and we moved on developing our own tastes at first and then being influenced by others.

         As for the others, my friends, they had brothers and sisters closer in age so the trickle down effect occurred. The music was played in the household by the elder and when they weren’t around the younger played it for us. Many of my friends were in band and orchestra so they would practice to this stuff. One guy played stand up base with his fingers (no pick) to Allman Brothers Band while his brother played drums. Even at that time our tastes were way out on the fringes, I think it had something to do with the circle or strange attractors. Allman Brothers Band, the Original Genesis, The Mahavishnu Orchestra with John McLaughlin, Rory Gallagher>, Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars, and T-Rex. "Jeepster" still reminds me of Gerry Ebert and the time I asked her out for ice cream after the Spring Carnival at high school. Even for others of the time this was not mainstream stuff. One introduced the other by way of an older brother or sister.

Ziggy Stardust is a peculiar song. When Bowie sings it we actually hear remorse in his voice over the fact that the kids had killed a man hence his reason for breaking up the band. On the "B" side, when Bauhaus plays their interpretation of Bowie's "Ziggy Stardust," Peter Murphy plays a different emphasis: Ziggy is upset that he had to break up the band because the kids had killed a man, i.e. Ziggy is really so sucked up into his ego, there's no remorse for the dead man but remorse that he could no longer feed his ego. Whoa! Now there's a different take.

         “In 1994 she was just starting college, and I believe the music turned popular at the time was ‘grunge.’ Actually it was a little sooner and was originally called the “Seattle Movement” (versus the Manchester Movement) Nirvana, Sonic Youth, Pearl Jam, and Soundgarden. Neil Young at the time period was in the mood to play with his band Crazy Horse because they had not done some good hard metal in years so out he came with most of these guys as warm up. Because of Neil’s “Arc Weld Tour and also his association of denims and flannels others called them “cowpoke” bands. Neil was given the name the “Godfather of Grunge” because a guy almost 30 years older was burying these kids with his energy and his searing guitar. Neil was playing his guts out. He was playing like it was 72’ and 75’ all over again. “The Gin Blossoms and Soul Asylum”, yes I remember these bands. I wore flannels my entire life open with a t-shirt, who knew it would become a "style."

A response to P.C. Paul's "Is It Really so Strange" by N. Barsky
I wonder, who here has composed music? I started when I was twelve. I'd compose tunes on the Casio synthesizer. I composed so many that I eventually didn't need a musical instrument, I'd just do it in my head. Sometimes I'd come up with songs while dreaming. I'm not trying to boast, here. I've never pursued a professional career in music. I didn't say that I was any good. But when you have a composing ability, you do it automatically, whether you're good or not. Songs just come to you, whether you like it or not. In that sense, the music does invent the composer rather than the other way around.

A response to N. Barsky's post by P.C. Paul
That's Kewl. I had friends who played, formal training, One went to Julliard in NYC graduated and dropped (he was the stand up base doing Allman Brother), others were Garage Band junkies some of which could read sheet music some could not. I don't remember anyone composing until a few years ago. It was a bizarre triangle. One was a musician into computers, a computer geek and a woman who was a music teacher. The Musician and the Music Teacher were friends, the two guys were friends by way of interest in computers and the Music Teacher married the Computer Geek and not the Musician. Go figure?

         Do you find that when you compose you use the same side of your brain that you use for literary analysis?

"Is It Really so Strange" a response to N. Horstman's "She's Always a Woman..." by M.J. Bowen
It's not so bad that you don't buy into new music that much. Until I got XM radio, I only listened to my CDs in my car. XM opened me up to so much more than everyday radio (which I have coined, "Broken-record Radio" since the radio just plays the same ten songs all day long). Modern music that is in the mainstream is not all that great, so I can see why you would just stick to what you like.

         Actually, and I hope that everyone reads this reply, I have an issue of Blender magazine that has the top 50 CD's of 2005. I bought a pretty decent amount of CD's in 2005 (new ones too, not just stuff from years before). Care to guess how many of the top 50 CDs I had actually bought?... ZERO! Yup, apparently I don't listen to the "good stuff" and I was surprised because I did buy some stuff that is considered good stuff (or so I thought) like Nickelback and Weezer. Oh well. It doesn't bother me any. Frankly, I don't even like 90% of the stuff on that list. Most of the CDs, I'd never heard of, but I can tell that I'm not missing out.

         And Billy Joel is fucking awesome! So, it's great that you like his music. I'm all excited because I am going to see "Moving Out" tonight at the Hippodrome. The only thing that would be better would be if Billy Joel was in the show :-)

         Trying to pick a song for this assignment took me a while. At first, I couldn’t narrow down my choices (I have tons of favorite songs). Then, after I would choose a song, I would try to decide if it was the right one to share with the class. I even psyched myself out for a few of them and questioned what the class or whoever was going to listen would think if I had this song or that song. In the end, I decided to go with the one that fit my mood for the day, which was Jill Scott’s “Long Walk.” I think that it was a good choice because it was a representation of a piece of me. It was a really “chill” type song.

         As I said, music can be influential. I do believe that music can influence a mood, or a style. However, I don’t think that it has to be the only determining factor in why you do what you do or act the way that you do. In a way, I guess I do somewhat agree that music can define the person; however I think it depends on the person.

         I also think that there are certain things that influence the music that we listen to like friends or the environment. For example, before coming up here to school, I had never heard Baltimore Club music, I had grown up with Go-go, not this weird Techno type music. But because every time I turned around my friends were listening to it or that was what was playing on the radio, it started to grow on me, and now I like it.

         The music that I listen to is all very different. I like a bunch of different types. I usually end up listening to certain songs because I’ve heard them when I’m around my friends and I’m like, “that’s so great!” The music that I listen to usually reflects my many different tastes and interests.

A response to A. Reed's "Are you influenced?" by P.C. Paul
“I think that music is a technology that we use to express ourselves.” Yes, agreed. While it is a powerful and influential tool, I believe that it is only as influential to our lives as we want it to be.” Yes this is very important for those who maintain a sense of identity versus allowing someone to create an “off the rack” identity for us. “I think that sometimes music allows us to think about new ways of thinking or styles and by doing that some people think that it is defining us.” I can agree with this also. I have used music for the purpose of understanding other cultures. It has also acted as a passport especially when trying to cross ethnicity’s. The feeling being “He can’t be all that bad after all he listens to our music. I used to get this quite often with Reggae because my tapes had Jamaican DJ’s and the stuff only the Jamaican community recognized. Once asked where it came from and when I was drilled about artists, I proved I spoke the language; I gained admittance and acceptance, which allowed me to lean more about the culture and even the hangouts.

         “Trying to pick a song for this assignment took me a while. At first, I couldn’t narrow down my choices” I had the same problem because of the message to send and the time constraint. It wasn’t a favorite because that wasn’t the question. “(I have tons of favorite songs).”

         Even musicians that were/are reluctant to be defined by an image, put forth an image. My best friend, in true Midwestern fashion, is a die-hard fan of Bob Dylan, Cat Stevens, Joan Baez, and the likes. Though those artists often rebelled against the dominant culture, they ended up creating a dominant culture. My friends clothes, and sayings, reflect her interpretation of the images those artists put forth. My girl, born after her time, dresses everyday as if she were at “Bonnaroo.”

         So, yes, music does have the power to affect how we speak, dress, and act. But, it is less the music itself that shapes our representation of it via clothes etc., and more the image of the music that shapes our representation/embodiment of it.

         Question 2.) I think that I choose music that shapes my tastes and interests. The type of music I listen to is dependent on my mood. I listen to a variety of music, mostly because I have a variety of friends. It is more important to me to find songs that speak to my mood, than it is to listen to songs to fit an image. Perhaps since I don’t have a favorite genre, my clothes don’t favor any genre. Certain artists speak to different interests that I have-political, artistic, social, love, hate, or just music for music’s sake so I can forget about all the bull@#!, and just relax.

         Question 3.) Though music is powerfully influential, it cannot define a person who has not defined themselves. Music is something I/ we use to relate to. Therefore, we define music. Music, as a technology, is created to serve a specific purpose, whether it is abstract or concrete. And since we create it, we define it--it is an extension of ourselves.

         Discussion: Perhaps, the best decision our group made was to participate in the activity. Since I was able to play the game along with my classmates, I was able to learn more about the meanings that I assigned to music. I was able to see my own prejudices, and have fun in the process. Through my participation in the activity, I concluded that I use technology to define myself, but that technology does not define me. As the rightful owners of each theme song were revealed, I learned that you can’t judge a book by its cover; clothes do not always mean to the owner what they communicate to the observer; and music is a technology of great importance to virtually everyone. If I had to venture a guess, I would say that music is the one technology “we” can’t live without. I’d like to thank my classmates, and Shipka, for making this presentation a great experience.

Response to E. Wodward's "Thanks For Making Our Presentation a Blast!" by P.C. Paul
“... or rather the images that it presents. I would venture to say that music, today, is highly visual. With music videos, and televised concerts, images are attached to music in very bold and very repetitive ways. Our society bombards us with visual images, and music is no exception.” None of which we stop for a moment to decode what is the message being delivered. Most of us just swallow it hook, line, and sinker. Gulp!

         “I would argue that it is hard for us to think of any musician, especially a popular artist, without referencing an image of that person.” With the new media as it is I have sneaky feeling you’re right. I worked with a music expert in a computer store for a few years. He would create demos for musicians, but he never mentioned video. Even then, 1996-2000, I can’t how video wouldn’t have been important.

         “... we also connect to image.” No, no, that’s a generational thing. I was in General Chemistry when MTV first aired and a few of us were already late twenties. We were afraid the music would spoil our own mental visuals. It turned out there was no effect. The artists version became just that. Just another version and interpretation not to be taken literally even if it was by the artist.

         “Even musicians that were/are reluctant to be defined by an image, put forth an image. My best friend, in true Midwestern fashion, is a die-hard fan of Bob Dylan, Cat Stevens, Joan Baez, and the likes. Though those artists often rebelled against the dominant culture, they ended up creating a dominant culture.” Agreed, the clothes actually become uniforms/symbols. It’s semiotic message.

         You see what happened after punk was post-punk. We got smart and if it couldn’t be worn every day then only wear it to the club. If you couldn’t hold down a respectable job with it, then don’t do it. The Brits figured this out and it takes three years for the trend to spill over here. That’s why Sarah was a surprise. Your head is a nice quiet space no one can get into. No one knows what’s in there unless you share it with them.

A response to P.C. Paul's post by N. Barsky
What I find amazing is how often the content of songs is misinterpreted. There are a lot of famous examples of this. The Police's "Every Breath You Take" is such a popular love song that some people have played it at their weddings. Doesn't anyone notice that the lyrics are about a stalker?

         Then there's Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the U.S.A.," which was seized on by the leading presidential candidates at the time (Ronald Reagan and Walter Mondale) as some kind of patriotic anthem, when in fact it was a bitter song about the treatment of Vietnam War veterans. I find it incredible that so many people failed to notice this. How could they have overlooked the sarcasm in the line, "sent me off to a foreign land to go and kill the yellow man"? Did they think this was celebrating the event?

         Sometimes misinterpreting the lyrics has had deadly consequences, as in Charles Manson's interpreting "Helter Skelter" as a warning of the approaching race war, or a couple of teens thinking Ozzy Osbourne's "Suicide Solution" was a call to commit suicide. Both these cases said a lot more about the people doing the interpreting than about the songs themselves. Of course, I do not believe that music causes violence, but that's another topic for another conversation.

         I have ambivalent feelings about music videos. On the one hand, I can see the artistry in them. I've always found them fundamentally dreamlike. But I like to familiarize myself with a song before seeing the video. This is because I'm a visual person, and I always feel the desire to create my own internal visual representation of a song I hear. But if I see the video first, it distorts this process, and I don't like that feeling.

         One of the most overrated videos has to be the heavily imitated "Addicted to Love." I've always liked the song (is that a guilty pleasure?), but the video somehow seems wrong. It's hard to explain why. Maybe it's that the movement of the actors (Robert Palmer and the models with the guitars) is too relaxed, and clashes with the feel of the music.

         What Chris describes about punk is a paradox that happens in many eras. The people who try to rebel against the mainstream end up becoming the mainstream, and the whole cycle starts over.

A response to N. Barsky's post by P.C. Paul
"What I find amazing is how often the content of songs is misinterpreted. There are a lot of famous examples of this. The Police's "Every Breath You Take" is such a popular love song that some people have played it at their weddings. Doesn't anyone notice that the lyrics are about a stalker?"

         Hahahaha. I actually laughed when I read that. There are people who play that as a wedding song? I know it’s a song about a stalker but evidently others don’t.

         "Then there's Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the U.S.A.," which was seized on by the leading presidential candidates at the time (Ronald Reagan and Walter Mondale) as some kind of patriotic anthem, when in fact it was a bitter song about the treatment of Vietnam War veterans." Right, (I can’t stand him) he was using the one finger salute.

         "I find it incredible that so many people failed to notice this. How could they have overlooked the sarcasm in the line, "sent me off to a foreign land to go and kill the yellow man"? Did they think this was celebrating the event?" People just don’t get it all too often.

         "Sometimes misinterpreting the lyrics has had deadly consequences, as in Charles Manson's interpreting "Helter Skelter" as a warning of the approaching race war," Sheeeh! Tell me about it!

         "… or a couple of teens thinking Ozzy Osbourne's "Suicide Solution" was a call to commit suicide." There as a whole genre of that stuff.

         "I have ambivalent feelings about music videos. On the one hand, I can see the artistry in them." Some. "I've always found them fundamentally dreamlike." Some. There was one I remember all too well by Nine-Inch Nails and it was spine chilling. It glorified heroin in the heroin user codes. People thought it was kewl. It was anything but kewl. When I was in the club in the mid to late 80’s there were three camps literally arguing with each other across the music. One was clean and pointing to the Heroin addicts saying, "Look at what you’re doing to yourself. The second camp were heroine addicts that were considered "hopeful." Most of their music was a plea for help from the "clean guy or gal." And then… the hopeless. Some of them were blatantly obvious.

         "But I like to familiarize myself with a song before seeing the video. This is because I'm a visual person, and I always feel the desire to create my own internal visual representation of a song I hear. But if I see the video first, it distorts this process, and I don't like that feeling." I mentioned that and I agree.

         One of the most overrated videos has to be the heavily imitated "Addicted to Love." I've always liked the song (is that a guilty pleasure?),..." No because I liked Robert Palmer from his debut album and saw him in "My Father’s Place" a real small intimate night club in 1975. "Sneaking Sally Through the Alley, Got to keep her out of sight." So why was Robert sneaking Sally through the ally anyway? And why did he have to keep her out of sight? Simple. Sally was a hooker, and Robert was a small time lounge singer or a lounge lizard. I also have a sneaky suspicion "Addicted to Love" is heroine song. "Love" or the "Love Drug" is one word used by heroine addicts. "But the video somehow seems wrong. It's hard to explain why."

Okay, I looked at the lyrics. It’s a double meaning. We’re too stupid to read the code.
Here’s the code: Robert Palmer is obvious and not subtle:

Your lights are on, but you're not home
(no the addict just shot up and when they do first claim is they feel a full body orgasm and as though they are on fire. This feeling gives way to an out of body experience a few moments later, therefore "nobody’s home.)

Your mind is not your own
(Right, they claim there mind goes off and travels. Body is where it is, but the mind is traveling)

Your heart sweats, your body shakes
(Heart and heat: code words)
(Your body shakes because they are going through withdrawal. They feel cold and ache like a feeling of rigamortis)

Another kiss is what it takes
(Of course, another kiss is another shot of heroine, if you chose a "hard option"/needle, "soft option" they smoke it)

You can't sleep, you can't eat
(When you’re on heroine no you don’t eat or sleep, you’re speeding)

There's no doubt, you're in deep
(Take it once and yes, you’re already in deep. The book by a psychologist is "Heroine: Don’t even try it once.")

Your throat is tight, you can't breathe
(Heroine withdrawal symptoms)

Another kiss is all you need
(Shoot some more, that always makes you feel better)

Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
(you’d like to think that this will be the time you don’t have to shoot up)

It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough, you know you're
Gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love
(You’re addicted to heroine)

You see the signs, but you can't read
You're runnin' at a different speed
(Your mind is racing, speeding)

You heart beats in double time
(again referrals to the heart/heart ache is another common clue also daggers, knives, and guns and any variances and I have heard some creative variances like M-16’s etc.)

Another kiss and you'll be mine, a one track mind
(Okay now the drug is speaking to the addict. Addicts consider heroine a lover because of the full body orgasm)

You can't be saved
(some addicts don’t want to be saved, and I already cited that)

Oblivion is all you crave
(Death is what he means. New Order said it differently, "Now I know the Perfect Kiss is the kiss of death and this is nothing new because it's all throughout great literature the fact that the Prefect Kiss is the kiss of Death.)

If there's some left for you
(Now he’s talking about being in a "shooting gallery" a place where many addicts will gather and share a needle also referred to by "The Replacements" as a "stem." The Replacements lyrics are another good place to look for obvious code words in their lyrics)

You don't mind if you do
(share a needle)

Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough, you know you're
Gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love

Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love

Your lights are on, but you're not home
Your will is not your own
You're heart sweats and teeth grind
Another kiss and you'll be mine

Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough, you know you're
Gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love

Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love
Might as well face it, you're addicted to love

Another code was to look at the person’s pupils in a dark setting like the nightclub. If it's dark how can your pupils be dilated? Simple, they’re speeding.

"Maybe it's that the movement of the actors (Robert Palmer and the models with the guitars) is too relaxed, and clashes with the feel of the music." It was the models because if you remember he did two videos with the same models.

Now that I reflect on the models, they also have dire implications. All the models were done up in “white face” like the “pastie whites” or the gothic chicks. Heroin addicts eventually become light sensitive; therefore, they eventually try to avoid bright sunlight. Eventually they loose their pigment due to a lack of sunlight and become “pastie white.” The more I think about the implications and the semiology, the stronger this argument becomes in my favor.

A response to P.C. Paul's post by N. Barsky
I don't think I've ever thought about what "Addicted to Love" meant until this moment. That's what it's like with me and music: I can go for years listening to a song without even considering what it means. Your interpretation does make sense, but we need to be careful here. We could say that the song is simply comparing love to a drug. That's the most obvious interpretation.

         I browse web sites like songmeanings.net and songfacts.com, which feature message boards where users come together to discuss song lyrics. I have found something interesting: no matter what the song, there's always at least one person who thinks it's about drugs. I realize that a lot of songs are about just that, but sometimes it gets a little ridiculous. Out of curiosity, what is your take on "Puff the Magic Dragon"? (One user writes: "Either these people were totally stoned when they made this song, or the song is about being totally stoned.")

         On another note, I was listening last night to Faith No More's "A Small Victory," and I decided to look up the lyrics, which I never had done before. (To paraphrase Clueless, trying to understand a Faith No More song is like looking for meaning in a Pauly Shore movie.) I was sure the first line was "The higher I came..." but the lyrics sites claim it's "A hierarchy." The ambiguity could be deliberate.

         On the discussion for "Bohemian Rhapsody," some idiot wrote that the song was Freddie Mercury talking about having AIDS. This guy didn't seem to realize that the song is from 1975, long before anyone had heard of the disease. I have to scratch my head that he would ignore the plain meaning of the line "I just killed a man, put a gun against his head, pulled a trigger and now he's dead." But many people are like this, eagerly springing some "metaphoric" explanation before even considering what a song is saying on the surface. "Bohemian Rhapsody" does have a few levels: it sounds like someone on trial for murder, but it could also be judgment in afterlife. Still, I believe that when interpreting any work--a song, a book, a movie, or whatever--you first need to consider the most basic level before searching for a deeper explanation.

A response to N. Barsky's post by P.C. Paul
“I don't think I've ever thought about what "Addicted to Love" meant until this moment. That's what it's like with me and music: I can go for years listening to a song without even considering what it means. Your interpretation does make sense, but we need to be careful here. We could say that the song is simply comparing love to a drug. That's the most obvious interpretation.”

         No we don’t think about something like a drug as love and love as a drug. It’s not our culture. As I pointed out to the person who passed me the code, that’s the way a particular “sub-culture” is interpreting the song. Lyrics are just like poetry. There is a great deal of “space” for interpretation.

         “I browse web sites like songmeanings.net and songfacts.com, which feature message boards where users come together to discuss song lyrics. I have found something interesting: no matter what the song, there's always at least one person who thinks it's about drugs. I realize that a lot of songs are about just that, but sometimes it gets a little ridiculous. Out of curiosity, what is your take on "Puff the Magic Dragon"? (One user writes: "Either these people were totally stoned when they made this song, or the song is about being totally stoned.")” Knowing a little about Peter, Paul, and Mary, The Hitchhiker’s Guide entry says, “Predominantly Harmless.” I think it meant what it “literally” meant, it’s just a pretty little diddy. Of course there are those who will “pervert” anything provided enough “space.”

         “On the discussion for "Bohemian Rhapsody," some idiot wrote that the song was Freddie Mercury talking about having AIDS. This guy didn't seem to realize that the song is from 1975, long before anyone had heard of the disease. I have to scratch my head that he would ignore the plain meaning of the line "I just killed a man, put a gun against his head, pulled a trigger and now he's dead." But many people are like this, eagerly springing some "metaphoric" explanation before even considering what a song is saying on the surface. "Bohemian Rhapsody" does have a few levels: it sounds like someone on trial for murder, but it could also be judgment in afterlife. Still, I believe that when interpreting any work--a song, a book, a movie, or whatever--you first need to consider the most basic level before searching for a deeper explanation.” Again, I think it meant what it said.

         I remember you guys asking this question in class, "Does your music define you or do you define your music?" the music I listen to defines me in every way possible. For instance, I have a very laid back personality, sometimes too much so. I looove the beach. I like to surf and just hang out and jam on the guitar. I prefer comfort over fashion opting for a nice pair of jeans and a hoodie rather than dressing for the Hilton. I listen to a lot of Jack Johnson, John Mayer, Ben Harper, Tristan Prettyman, and Donavon Frankenreiter. If you looked any of these kids up in the dictionary, you'd probably find them as definitions for the word "chill." I’d be in there, too, of course :-) no, but, really, they play mostly acoustic/folk/surf type music and that obviously has a huge impact on how I choose to present myself to the world. These artists even influence the kind of music that I play.

         On the other hand, I think that I define my music as well. I mean, nobody's pointing a gun at my head and telling me to listen to Jack Johnson. I choose to do so. But, this is where it all comes full circle. I choose to listen to artists like jack because of my personal tastes in music which are influenced by the type of person that I am. Is this all making sense? I hope so. It sounded good in my head. Moving on...

         On to the bigger picture about technology defining us or us defining technology. Wow. That’s a scary thought. I like to think that we, as a human race, define technology. I mean, technology can't be created unless there's a human to create it. But, these days, we have created machines that can create technologies for us. A good example of this is the automobile assembly line. They don't use people anymore. It’s all machines putting cars together now. Craaazy. So, this issue, as with the music thing, can go both ways. We define technology, which in turn defines us. Pretty freaky huh? To think that your computer is defining you! It’s so true though.

"A response to B. Bauhaus' "Music is Eeeeverything" by P.C. Paul
“I believe, in every way possible, music most definitely influences how we define ourselves, what we wear, how we speak, what we say, how we act, etc. Music is everything. Period. I try to ponder a world without music and it seriously frightens me. Can you imagine? What if Mozart or Bach never existed? What is B.B. King never shredded the blues guitar? What if Billy Joel never kept me grounded???” You’re one of the few who says music played an influence in who you are and who you are influenced the music. I only met one person who didn’t listen to music and he was weird. No, really weird as in creepy, non-human. He was a brilliant computer scientist and combined his degree with medicine.

         “On the other hand, I think that I define my music as well. I mean, nobody's pointing a gun at my head and telling me to listen to Jack Johnson. I choose to do so. But, this is where it all comes full circle. I choose to listen to artists like jack because of my personal tastes in music which are influenced by the type of person that I am. Is this all making sense? I hope so. It sounded good in my head.” Here’s why it makes sense. The artist will not be around very long if no one buys his or her music. The artist creates the music and we as consumers decide to buy or not buy on subjective choices. The more we buy, the more they produce. We don’t buy, they don’t produce. You can’t sell something that does not have a buyer.

         ”On to the bigger picture about technology defining us or us defining technology. Wow. That’s a scary thought. I like to think that we, as a human race, define technology. I mean, technology can't be created unless there's a human to create it. But, these days, we have created machines that can create technologies for us. A good example of this is the automobile assembly line. They don't use people anymore. It’s all machines putting cars together now. Craaazy. So, this issue, as with the music thing, can go both ways. We define technology, which in turn defines us. Pretty freaky huh? To think that your computer is defining you! It’s so true though.” I talked about this. The future points to humans becoming more machine like and machines becoming more human. The difference from the machine’s point of view could be we have a soul (maybe) and the machines referred to it as a ghost and the other difference being we die. It’s amazing how the syndrome of the “Tin Man” is played over and over.

         I think in the beginning I had a interest in belly dancing, I started to listen to Arabic music (don’t get me wrong I listen to all sorts of music but since I brought Arabic music I thought I would base my examples and explanations on that). I think also in the beginning when I [began] to dance/perform belly dancing I became known [by] my group of friends [as] "Oh that girl likes Arabic music, or she dancing in Arabic music." Literally that is what my group of friends link me with and I think because of that I increased my knowledge and love for the Arabic world (besides coming from that side). I feel that we define technology. I feel that since a song is a highly based on popularity (meaning how many people by the CD). I think because the listeners choose who they like, I think this is why and how we define technology. If words were said that were not favored by society, that group and song would be long gone. I was practically all wrong with the class experiment. I based most of all my guesses on the way the people looked. If the person looked the part that I think fitted in that type of music I would put those two together. That is not a right technique and I got most of my answers wrong. I feel technology is very powerful, and I think one is not careful it can overtake that person. What do you think?

"A response to A. Sheikh's "Arabic Music" by P.C. Paul
“But I think society itself is influenced by music in every aspect. That it depends on the individual person how much they put themselves in society.” Those who are easily influenced will be and those who are not will not be. I think Matt hit the nail on the head by saying there were three types: Conformist, Non-conformist, Middle of the Road. It seems to pretty well cover the extremes and variances.

         “I think since I was practically the only one to bring music in another language to class, I think my taste and interests are defined to me the music I listen to. I feel since I listen to Arabic music, love belly dancing (in the beginning part of my obsession) now my love for Arabic culture has evolved around me and I choose all sorts of middle eastern music, that is why I think my interest are defined by music. But I think I also fall in the first part of the category (my music based on my interest and taste) I think in the beginning I had a interest in belly dancing, I started to listen to Arabic music (don’t get me wrong I listen to all sorts of music but since I brought Arabic music I thought I would base my examples and explanations on that) I think also in the beginning when I [began] to dance/perform belly dancing I became known by my group of friends as, “Oh that girl likes Arabic music,” or “She dances to Arabic music.”

         “Literally that is what my group of friends link me with and I think because of that I increased my knowledge and love for the Arabic world (besides coming from that side). I feel that we define technology.” Old friends said that there was a genre in the record store called “Chris Music,” funny, I never did find that section and it would have made hunting and collecting easier. Some said I wasn’t from this planet, others said I wasn’t from this galaxy, others said I wasn’t even from this universe. I begged to differ and said I’m a transient from another dimension.

         “I was practically all wrong with the class experiment. I based most of all my guesses on the way the person looked. If the person looked the part that I think fitted in that type of music I would put those two together. That is not a right technique and I got most of my answers wrong. I feel technology is very powerful, and I think one is not careful it can overtake that person. What do you think?” what I think is I was right on two counts and only voted twice. I had Matt pegged and I had Shipka pegged. They both played straight and they focused on the lyrics and I identified the code word: Matt = Lazy (actually he means “laid back”, Shipka = Home. Some pegged me because of an early post in 407. Those like myself who crossover [between the spaces of 324 and 407] recognized the sound of the base guitar. I talked about how the “hollow base guitar” caused a text to finally come out to the light that was remaining in incubation. The sound of the guitar was the code.

         I have such a strong appreciation for music today because I grew up playing the flute, drums, singing and performing. Music is a very complicated form of art and I don’t limited myself to just listening to R&B and rap anymore. I listen to music based off, the lyrics, the vocals and beats. I enjoy alternative, soul, gospel, jazz, oldies, rock and etc. The only type of music that had never really grabbed me is country, though I do like the new Faith Hill and Tim McGraw song. Growing up in Prince George’s County, I limited myself to go-go, rap and R&B in high school because of my peers and environment. I couldn’t say I like all of this music because I would definitely get my feeling hurt. I was more of an in the closet fan for most music and for my love of guitars. The song chose in class was based of what I listen to at the moment. The Kirk Franklin CD was a gift to me, and I found such motivating songs on there, especially number 15, First Love. I love listening to music that brings across a positive message and has a universal theme that anyone could relate too.

         I think as a society, it is hard to tell whether music defines us or do we define it. I look at my sister and my younger cousins, and they want to look like Beyonce, Ashanti or who ever else and this is who they follow after. Or even when I’m watching MTV’s Made, the people on the show are changed to appear more like the music they are trying to present (if that makes sense). Personally as I’m getting older, my overall appearance is something that doesn’t come from music or the media it is just who I am. My style is never the same, it evolves as I get older and the music I enjoy is just the same.

         In my personal experience, I use music in various ways. As I have previously mentioned in class, I love to go dancing at eighties clubs. In this case I definitely dress the part for a specific purpose and that is to be as loud visually as the music. In this way the music is a factor in my clothing choice. If I am dancing to Blonde or Le Tigre, I must have 12 pink necklaces on. In contrast, my favorite musicians are Bob Dylan, Cat Stevens, and Johnny Cash and I do not walk around with a harmonica strapped to my neck and nor do I try to look more poor and beat up than I already am…if anything I try, unsuccessfully, to hid my horrible lack of funds.

         I also think that age is a large factor in terms of how much music influences what one wears and claims it as a symbol for themselves. I host an Open Mic Night for high school students and at that stage and even younger they are grasping at an identify that is something different than their parents.’ Regardless of decade, there is the “it” that is so often pursued to be obtained. Right now it is tight jeans and huge belts for boys with long black hair draped over one eye completing that “emo” look. I remember when my sisters, who when through this stage in the early eighties craved “jammer pants” because of MC Hammer. Now this is not cool. Soon emo kids will have children that will scoff at the torn denim and studded apparel. Bands like MXPX and Simple Plan escalade these contemporary trends. Kids grasp onto it because they feel the need to stereotypically “fit in.” In this fashion I believe that music dictates fashion. As we as humans age, we find ourselves satisfactorily defined in more substantial and subtle ways. Take Christopher Paul for example, he is conservatively dressed but he listens to a wide variety of music that mainstream ideologies would not place with him because mainstream is not concerned with content as Christopher is... but rather figures in sales.

A response to S. Miller's "Jammer Pants: Can't Touch This" by P.C. Paul
“I love to go dancing at eighties clubs. In this case I definitely dress the part for a specific purpose and that is to be as loud visually as the music. In this way the music is a factor in my clothing choice.”

         THAT’S IT! I thought I recognized the style of dress. Old codes. A long forgotten uniform. (“I love a Man in Uniform” Gang of Four) It has been a long time. I do not walk around with a harmonica strapped to my neck (“I thought that if you had, an acoustic guitar, Then it meant that you were, A Protest Singer, Oh, I can smile about it now, But at the time it was terrible, No, Mamma, let me go” Shakespeare’s Sister, The Smiths) and nor do I try to look more poor and beat up than I already am…if anything I try, unsuccessfully, to hid my horrible lack of funds (“To Hell with poverty… We’ll get drunk on cheap wine… Ohhhhhhhhh… Ow, Ow, Ow, Ow.”)

         “I also think that age is a large factor in terms of how much music influences what one wears and claims it as a symbol for themselves.” One young man way back when had one of those little tiny ponytails and the rest of his hair cropped neat before it was fashionable. I never understood it. One day as he was bending over into an engine compartment working another mechanic said, “What is that thing?” One of the women mechanics was around at the time reached over and flipped his little ponytail and said, “It’s a symbol of his people” and walked away. The guy with the tail had an accent (Eastern European) but I didn’t bother to think about it. Months later it snapped. It was a joke, a play on words. “It was a symbol of his P-e-o-p-l-e, The Woodstock Nation, he was an ex-hippie! Ohhhhhhhhhhhh. Now I get it! How clever. Semiotics once again hard at work. And so, the clothes you wear are a symbol of YOUR people, otherwise how could your people identify that you are one of them. Semiotics hard at work.

         “Take Christopher Paul for example, he is conservatively dressed but he listens to a wide variety of music that mainstream ideologies would not place with him because mainstream is not concerned with content as Christopher is... but rather figures in sales.”

Two points:

1) I took Paul Weller’s advise from The Jam and decided:
“the public gets what the public wants
But I want nothing this society's got
I'm going underground, (going underground)
Well the brass bands play and feet start to pound
Going underground, (going underground)”

You see me as conservative, you greet me as conservative, I’m accepted as conservative, I am treated as a conservative. You are judged as you are dressed, like it or not. Yet in my “private space,” my “Sanctuary” formally, Southern Death Cult, formally, Death Cult, politically reduced to “The Cult” I am certainly not what you think. Hence my alternate pen name “Blackie Blackhole or Blackhole. And no, the nickname was formed long before and has a stranger story than the ones I have already told. Thank someone for Non-Fiction because Fact is much stranger than fiction.

2) Sarah, please hand this request to the DJ in "Club Shipka":

Dear Mr. DJ,
Please play “Panic” by The Smiths,
because the music that you constantly play
IT SAYS NOTHING TO ME ABOUT MY LIFE!!!!

All together now, sing:
Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ
Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
HANG THE DJ, HANG THE DJ
Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ, Hang the DJ
HANG THE DJ

(Sing)
(Sing)
Hey now, hey now now, sing This Corrosion to me
Hey now, hey now now, sing This Corrosion to me
Hey now, hey now now, sing This Corrosion to me
Hey now, hey now now, sing...

She stands pressed against the wall
So she can see the door
In case the laughing strangers crawl and
Crush the petals on the floor

Alice in her party dress
She thanks you kindly
So serene
She needs you like she needs her tranqs
To tell her that the world is clean
To promise her a definition
Tell her where the rain will fall
Tell her where the sun shines bright
And tell her she can have it all
Today
Today

Pass the crystal spread the Tarot
In illusion comfort lies
The safest way the straight and narrow
No confusion no surprise

Alice in her party dressed to kill
She the thanks you turns away
She needs you like she needs her pills
To tell her that the world's okay
To promise her a definition
Tell her where the rain will fall
Tell her where the sun shines bright
And tell her she can have it all
Today
Today

Alice
Don't give it away

A response by M.J. Bowen to S. Miller's "Jammer Pants: Can't Touch This"
It's really late, so I might not be thinking straight, but I'm not sure if it is accurate to say that "wearing our music" is supposed to mean actually imitating the artist. I think that there are certain things that people wear that "signal" to observers that they may be into a certain genre, or genres (maybe even a specific artist). We subconsciously interpret these signals and then we look at the combinations to guesstimate what people are really into. Sometimes we guess right. Other times we guess wrong.

         Also, we may like something an artists does, but that really doesn't make us a fan. I like that Le Tigre song, "TKO." It's catching and fun and I heard it at a bowling alley. When I DLed the mp3, I went looking at info on the band. I was really shocked to learn that the "guy" in the band is actually a girl, but that's beside the point. I listened to a few other songs by Le Tigre and they just weren't for me. I don't think I had much of a point with that. I'm just stating what is probably the obvious. Damn, I need sleep.

         I just pulled all of this out of my butt.

A response by S. Miller to M.J. Bowen's response
That girl has one hell-of-a stash, indeed. I saw them live last Feb at Sonar and boy were they great. Lesbians on Ecstasy opened from them and it was super surreal.

         As I mentioned earlier, I often choose to listen to music based on my mood. For instance, if I’m upset about something, the last thing I want to hear is “Check On It” (by Destiny’s Child) or “Belly-dancer” (Akon.) Generally, I love listening to upbeat songs like these because they actually put me in an even better mood than I was in before I heard them. By choosing to listen to such songs, I’m defining myself to some extent. But by putting me in an even better mood, the songs are also defining, or at the very least influencing, me. Ultimately, however, the fact that you are choosing to listen to a particular song indicates that you are defining yourself by it, and not vice versa.