Search This Blog

Monday, February 21, 2011

We're only immortal for a limited time

From what critics called (probably before "Vapor Trails came out) Rush's darkest album, "Dreamline," is a tough tune to understand. 1991's "Roll the Bones," dealt a lot with the idea of death and the afterlife and what life really meant. I assume Peart was somewhat in the tone of the early 90s grunge movement perhaps. However, his fascinations and ponderings far surpass those of any Kurt Cobain or Chris Cornell.

"Dreamline," deals with the unknown path of one's life and how we are but wandering the face of the earth "learning that we're only immortal for a limited time." For the early 90s, and for all time, this tune is absolutely profound in Peart's lyrics. Standing alone, once again, "Dreamline" is absolute poetry. The words "we're only at home, when we're on the run," are somewhat haunting in that they stir up questions of where "home" really is. http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/rush/dreamline.html Check out the lyrics, because they're brilliant and at times hard to decipher.

Given also that many of the lyrics are about traversing space, one could postulate that Peart means "home" in the biblical sense as in heaven. Now that I think about it, however, I kind of doubt it, because he does not fancy himself a religious man. So perhaps it is a tongue-in-cheek lash at religion? Who knows? If anyone feels like looking at the lyrics and discussing, read 'em up and post comments, I'd be interested to find out what people think.

It could also be about growing up and how our dreams are huge and we want to conquer the stars with our "roadmap of Jupiter," but we begin to realize that we can only hang on to that teenager invincibility for so long. Whoa.

Also, I cannot forget the playing in this tune. It rocks hard and show Rush moving back to their power trio roots. There's more guitar and quite a bit less synth. It's an up tempo tune that holds great profundity. Please to the ears and the mind. Plus, when they play it live, the lasers synch up with the guitar riff in the opening. Just awesome. Check it out:

Sunday, February 13, 2011

PR Blog- Facebook and Twitter

'Twould seem I am at a loss of words for speaking on the merits of Facebook and Twitter. I do have the Twitter account because I have to, but I doubt I use it to its full potential. I have never had Facebook and if in my work I don't have to, I never will have it. However, with my sister and mom on it, I am starting to see why people use it. That is to say, I'm starting to see why people use it for its intended purpose rather than sometimes literally baring it all or posting "hilarious" photos of themselves piss-hammered and yakking. Yummy.

From what I can gauge, people use Twitter for quick comments, funny quips, and business announcements, among other things. I use it, for one, because I have to, and for another, to read the funny things that some people have to say. For instance, Seth MacFarlane Tweets some pretty hilarious stuff sometimes, and the made-up character known as the "Goddamn Batman," is priceless (based off of All-Star Batman and Robin, where Batman is kind of a douchebag, but hilariously so). I doubt I'd ever use it to meet girls or Tweet personal stuff, because it really is a public forum.

I sometimes find myself wanting to Tweet to celebrities and gush about how great they may be, but don't because everybody can read it and I'll look like teenage girl. It's actually rather interesting how that wall is broken down by Twitter. I can Tweet to any celebrity I follow. Whether or not they see the message is neither here nor there, but it somehow takes some of the glamour and ooh-la-la of celebrity in general. It really humanizes them (funny how I say humanize when Twitter is such an inorganic form of communication.. Somewhat paradoxical indeed).

Perhaps I am slightly jaded in that all I've ever seen Facebook used for is creeping on people, and a blatant overstatement of how people are doing. "So and so is busy on a Friday night." Who gives a shit? Well apparently a lot of people, much to my chagrin. Also much to my chagrin, Facebook has its "proper uses." My mother uses it to connect with family in Ireland and across Canada. My sister uses it to keep in touch with people from high school (which I think is crap, because if you want to keep in touch with anybody from high school, you stay in actual touch with them, you don't feign "give-a-shit").

What I keep hearing is that Facebook is used for personal things, and Twitter is used for more public stuff, which I can totally understand. People can personalize their Facebook pages, and people see what they want them to see. Twitter, on the other hand, you can personalize, but people see their own personalized pages, not your. Twitter is somewhat like an online forum as well; it's like one, big-ass, never-ending conversation, whereas Facebook is a back and forth, an online "tag," if you will.

Either way, each has its merit and its "proper" use. "Proper," being their intended purposes, i.e. communication and "keeping in touch," and not broadcasting drunken amusement, diarrhea-style. As PR tools, I think social media like Facebook and Twitter are a PR guy or gal's best friends nowadays. One person can literally communicate something to a potential audience of millions. Just remember, with great power, comes great responsibility. The best part of Facebook and Twitter is that captive audience. When I'm going through my Twitter timeline, even if there's stuff I don't care to read, I still skim it. I would imagine Facebook would be the same. Facebook is great because of the action principle. It's online and to get people on your band wagon, it often takes just a click. In other words, again, a potential following of millions thanks to the push of a button. Anybody else miss the good ol' days of carrier pigeons and when people actually wrote letters?

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Creative Writing Blog

Yet another off-topic blog. Here we go.

I would imagine that the relationship between a writer and the publication is somewhat like that of an expectant mother and the child growing inside her. Five bucks says everybody uses this analogy. Perhaps I should use the caterpillar-cocoon-butterfly analogy? Whatever analogy I use, think of it as a metamorphosis.


Like an expectant mother's journey to giving birth, I'd imagine the publication process is fraught with excitation and apprehension. The only difference is, a doctor isn't going to tell you, part way through, to start over and "re-write." But, I would the process involves the writer becoming impregnated this idea and they become attached to said idea and want to take it to term, so to speak. Throughout this gestation of sorts, there are ups and downs, call backs and a lack of call backs, perhaps writers even feel sick in the morning due to stress. Who knows?

As the deadline draws near, stress is heavy on the writer like that on the mother, who is probably big as a house and pissed off like a rodeo bull (with all due respect, ladies). All the stress on the mother's body makes her tired and irritable and she simply cannot wait to pop the damn thing out. I could see it being the same way for a writer with their publication. I think there would come a time where a writer would cussing away waiting for the pain and tension to be over so that their beautiful, bouncing baby book can come to light.

I would also imagine the results of publication are somewhat the same between expectant mother and writer: When that bundle of joy finally sees light, be it baby or book, there is jubilation and excitement and joy and all that good stuff because something you spent so long making and worked so hard for is now here. However, for writers, I think, in some small way, their book, making it to the point but not getting published, would feel like a stillbirth. It obviously wouldn't be as tragic, but you get the drift.

And after the piece is published, parenthood begins with all the worries and woes: Will it sell? Will people like it? Will it win awards? Will I have to go through all that again?

Thus, I would either go through traditional publishing or simply upload my piece to Amazon simply to avoid all of the now unnecessary tribulations involved with getting something published. To hell with it, so long as my work gets out there, let Amazon have the damn thing for free. I don't want to deal with the cramps, morning sickness, sore feet, and constantly having to pee.