kind of intrigued by how people can sit through the same show and have completely polar reactions.
I was bored shitless. still, pretty staging, kind of art nouveau music hall meets a 1910s/ 20s pre-jazz novelty band, and the notion of splitting the drum kit in half was clever, but the whole thing seemed suffocated by their adherence to the concept. the set pacing was plodding, some of the solos seemed tacked on for the sake of 'musicality' and Harvey's ambitions weren't matched by her vocal ability.
after a handful of songs I was gagging for a solid beat to cut through all the instrumentation (there was a lot of them on stage) and add punch to the bass lines. as for all the marching about, I thought Mick looked uncomfortable - if his Birthday Party self had been there I bet you dollars to donuts he'd have stormed the stage and kicked himself in the balls.
then there was her silence. now I don't mind some pretention and contrivance (St Vincent/ Bowie etc and so on) but the performance felt remote and oddly joyless. had a sense the band was less enjoying themselves then trying to make sure they hit their marks. I hoped they might kick it up a gear for the encore, but when they came out and started chanting "rules and regulations" I was a doneburger. she looked rock and roll but.
so, just to be clear, you're saying you're playing keys on this album?
that would be well cool. it also kinda means keeping your user name might have become a bit pointless. still, cool.
that guitar sound takes me back to some of those ferocious SPUD gigs at the Gluepot - say what you will about Glen's vocal, but that band was a force of nature.
mate, he carried them to Chch hisself. seems he drop kicked the little one first, split the posts too. then carried the big buggers out one over each shoulder - eat your heart out Meads.
champion. end of.
NZ politics? never mind all that, I hear tell Ritchie is all across the earthquake stuff. Once he's got that sorted we can get him onto housing.
and what the hell is a Chief Strategist anyway if it isn't about overtly looking to exploit everything and anything for political gain rather than finding solutions to problems?
other than that, I'm as guilty as anyone in following news sources that reinforce my own beliefs, but I do try not to take everything at face value or treat politics as a sporting event where you have to back your team.
and I do wonder about the motivation levels of journos who constantly see colleagues getting the chop for reasons that have nothing to do with how they did their job. when your story placement and ongoing income is dependent on clicks you'll inevitably find yourself chasing the low hanging fruit that peddle to short attention spans and those who get their jollies from outrage. argh, I think I'll go listen to some music.
that Cracked piece was quite the wake up - in a same but different line, there's also Jonathan Pie...
so, come on, don't hold out...what was the fee?
and Kevin's stubbied legs, eh?
hmm, maybe I'm wrong. headline on Stuff today: Lorde Loves 'Sex' a Lot.
did anyone just feel a bump?
can't remember who I was talking to on the night about this, but I get a little pissed off by all this 'investigative journalism' talk.
it isn't witchcraft or even particularly clever, it used to be called working your round. you know, getting out from time to time without deadline pressure and talking to people about what as happening then going back to your desk and maybe writing something. it wasn't even reliant on banging out endless OIAs.
you'd be amazed what you learn from actually meeting the people who do stuff, but who the hell has time for that now when you're being hassled to write up some bullshit on international breast sizes or some long deleted Lorde tweet?
Unfortunately, I don't think we've even reached rock bottom yet...argh, I think my lawn needs mowing.
other than that, top night Russell, I had a blast catching up with people over a pint or two. proper journalism that is.