Do Artists Need to Age With Their Audience?

As those of you who follow my Twitter know, I'm currently in upstate New York for my family's annual get-together later this evening. Taking full advantage of a little break from work and school, I'm going through some of the stuff that I've accumulated in the last few months. Amongst them, I finally completed Nick Hornby's newest book Juliet, Naked (it was a Christmas present) while listening to Weezer's newest album "Hurley". In doing both at the same time, it seems that each are appealing to their fans in different ways and it brings the following question to my head: Do artists need to age with their audiences?

Nick Hornby, whose book High Fidelity (and the subsequent movie) is amongst my favorites, spoke to me when I first found it just after college. The book, which tells the story of a late-20's hipster trying to figure out why his relationships have all gone bad spoke to me as my college girlfriend moved on to bigger-and-better things leaving me behind. In this book, a middle-aged English woman enters into an online flirtation with an aging reculisve American singer. So, in the 15 or so years since High Fidelity came out, the character's he writes about have aged roughly 15 years with him. And I ate the book up because I could still relate to its themes and characters as I've also aged with them.

Then, you go to "Hurley". I've been a Weezer fan since I first heard "Buddy Holly" playing on the old WKRO back in high school (back before they sold out and went country). "Hurley" seems to try recreating the themes and sounds of the Blue Album, though like High Fidelity, it came out nearly 15 years ago. And, while there are a few catchy songs, I'm just not that into it. What's funny is that this follows up last year's Red Album which I did enjoy, but that was because it seemed to have a mix of both the poppy Blue Album-style stuff with some more mature songs of Rivers talking about his wife and new baby.

There's just, to me, something off-putting about seeing someone write or perform something that seems no longer in their element. For ages, I hated Green Day for singing songs about life in high school though each of the guys looked like they were in their 30's, but Green Day also makes an apt example for my point. "American Idiot", which is a more mature and poignant album, I loved but many die-hard Green Day fans hated. So, does maturing as an artist alienate their fans, or do their fans appreciate that the group they started following 15 years ago because they could identify with them in their current lives still appreciate their music/literature, because they use themes that they still can identify with? Is their a difference between the two media - where readers are more accepting while music fans aren't? Just throwing it out there.

Random Stuff

• As Microsoft has decided to discontinue Windows Live Spaces, I have taken down my old blog over there. As I haven't been contributing much to my blog lately anyways, and for the last few months have been posting identical posts on both, not much will be lost. But, now Blogger is the official home of AOwL.com. Yes Google, you might want to consider having shirts made up.
• While also in my "non-school related" reading kick, I was also able to finish up John Booth's Collect All 21. I picked up the book, a collection of all the author's Star Wars related memories, following Star Wars Celebration V (speaking of which, I never uploaded the pictures from my camera... I will soon and post them here). Anyways, the book is great for the Star Wars fan like me as each of the stories is relatable. Even though Booth was at the age to see Star Wars in theaters (I guess I did too, technically. My mom took me to see it at the drive-in theater in Daytona. I'm somewhat hazy on the experience, though, as I was just 2 months-old), some of the stories about seeing the movies - especially Jedi and the prequels, which I was a little older for - I totally remember and can identify with. So, if you're a fan, it's cheap and fun and I'd recommend picking it up.
• Finally, another hand for Google, for finally allowing the non-"Coversation View" option for Gmail. I have been jumping between three e-mail addresses for the last few years because none offered a reading experience I enjoyed. My primary problem with Gmail was that, with Conversation View, it was so hard to find the message I was looking for. If an e-mail was sent out to a large group and out of 15 responses, you could have 14 just respond with OK or something while the 15th had something to add, but you'd never be able to find it without going through all of the others because it was such a pain to delete them. Gmail is finally a usable product for me. I think more love should go to whoever the new Gmail product manager is who's asking for these updates. Remember when you couldn't even delete anything in Gmail, and their response was "You have so much space, you don't need to delete things"? I appreciate the new features that Gmail offers, but I more appreciate that they make them optional now using the Labs feature instead of forcing them on you.

Why Do Adults Hate on Teen Culture?

I am a follower of Harry Potter’s dark wizard Lord Voldemort on Twitter (@Lord_Voldemort7).  While usually good for a Harry Potter joke or two, a few recent jokes he has made has started a Twitter war with the tween fans of pop icon Justin Bieber.  Poor Justin…  While beloved by his fanbase of teen girls, he is the target of near constant ridicule by everyone else.

At what point did adults start just outright start attacking the stuff popular with kids?  And I’m not talking Maude Flanders “What about the children?”-style protectionism.  This is a near constant skewering of Miley Cyrus, Twilight, and whatever the younger generations like, usually by those around my age on TV and on the web.

Here’s the funny thing…  C’mon Gen X’ers, looking back on it, was the shit we had at that age any cooler?  Lets use my timeline as an example.  I was “tween” (age 12) in 1989.  Looking at the top 10 songs in 1989, two came from what you’d consider teeny-boppers:  “Hangin’ Tough” by the New Kids on the Block and “Lost in Your Eyes” by Debbie Gibson.  While I remember some New Kids jokes, usually it was at the expense of Donnie being “old”, being the thug, and of course the time when he set his hotel room on fire.  Not at all the vitriol spewed at a 16 year-old kid like what’s happening to Bieber.  And really, the only thing I remember adults talking about Debbie Gibson was the “Who’s hotter?” game between her and Tiffany.  Were there the jokes about them like they made about Miley (and I’m not talking about now, but during her Hannah Montana heyday)?  While not comparable to Twilight and the whole vampire/werewolf craze, 1989 brought us about a dozen slasher movies including Friday the 13th Part VIII, Halloween 5, and A Nightmare on Elm Street 5.  In my mind cheesy-is-cheesy, no matter the genre.

I heard a great comment on Sirius XM’s Covino & Rich Show a few months ago.  Following the video of the little girl crying on YouTube because she loved Justin Bieber so much, co-host Steve Covino said that he would never let his baby daughter grow up to be the type who would like bubble gum pop music.  One of the listeners, a father of a young girl, called in with this – No matter how much he hated the music, no matter how much he thinks the lyrics are garbage, it made his daughter so happy that, in the end, he didn’t care.  They will grow up to realize that the music was dumb, but they will have great memories of that time in their lives.  In my opinion, to crap on Justin Bieber music to a 12 year-old girl is like telling a 6 year-old there’s no Santa Claus.

Personal Tidbit:  I have a great memory of pushing my newborn baby brother in his stroller around the Central Florida Fairgrounds, jamming to my Walkman and the newest tape I had bought at the Musicland in Altamonte Mall that I had gotten on the way there.  The tape I was bopping-around to and picking up my brother to dance with – To the Extreme by Vanilla Ice.  Yes, horrible music, but 20 years later I still remember that day.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love ESPN

It has been roughly three months since, after getting sick of the hyperbole and bickering, I dropped ESPN cold-turkey.  And not just ESPN, but pretty much the entire “sports talk” genre.  I’ll watch actual games when they’re on, but no more SportsCenter, PTI, Mike & Mike, or other shows I had traditionally watched.  And, frankly, I still feel I’m as much of a sports fan as ever.

What triggered my “boycott” of ESPN was their coverage around the Eastern Conference Finals between the Magic and Celtics.  As you probably remember, the Magic went down in the series 0-3, at which point the pundits start calling out how the Magic didn’t belong and projecting a future series against the Lakers (this is, of course, after many of them had picked the Magic to win the series after they had swept the first two rounds).  However the Magic came back to win the next two games, and they all change their tunes, picking the Magic to complete the “reverse” sweep and comparing it to the 2004 Yankees/Red Sox series.  And, of course, the Magic lose the next game and they immediately all switch back to how the Magic were a weak competitor who were outmatched.

That’s my main complaint about ESPN.  Not how they consistently favor teams that can help their ratings, not how they overhype stories (the 2010 NBA free agent class, Brett f’in Favre), not even TMZ-ing of athletes as celebutantes, but it’s this new focus they have on analyzing events that haven’t happened yet!  And it’s going on across the field of sports talk and even the print and online journalists have fallen into the trap.  Instead of actually covering the events and news from the day, they consistently feel the need to bring “perspective” by comparing everything to great moments in sports history (every SportsCenter has to have one random statistic compared to that other random statistic through the history of the game).  Or, they must constantly speculate, which I find is just brainless filler material.  The thing is, sometimes “picks” can be fun but it shouldn’t be something they focus on.  As the U.S. made the knock-out round of the World Cup, they were already prognosticating them making the finals and devoted a whole segment to their spectacular run.  Of course, they were immediately knocked out in their first game by Ghana.

Here’s some tips for the sports fan like me who still loves the games but have had enough of the ESPN’s over-the-top hype:

• If you just want highlights without as much of the “analysis”, I’ve been watching FSN’s Final Score over SportsCenter.
• As a fan on the Cubs and Bears, ESPN Chicago has their local SportsCenter.  Just highlights and some news without all the other fluff.  Of course, as of right now, ESPN only has local editions for a few major markets.
• Sports talk radio is not informative, it’s not even entertaining.  It’s just annoying blowhards arguing over stuff they don’t even know about with callers who know even less.  I actually kind of respect shows like Mike & Mike because they don’t take listener calls, though then it goes back to the over-analysis and prognostication that annoys me.

I’m guessing that I’m in the vast minority as ESPN continues adding more talk shows and analysis, but I know I can’t be the only one.

Time For a New 360 or PS3?

I’ve been very lucky to be the owner of both a PS3 and an Xbox 360.  While I’ve had my issues with each (my PS3 being merely a pricey Blu-ray player since there were no good games for it/360 red ring of death), each has their merits and I will pop on either one from time-to-time.

I’m thinking of selling both of my systems and replacing it with the newer models.  I love the new 360 design and my current one (an Arcade I got after my launch 360 red-ringed, using my old ones hard drive) is close to being maxed-out on space.  Meanwhile, while the Sony fanboys love to crack on how loud 360s can be, I’ve never had that issue with mine.  However my PS3 can sound like a jetfighter getting ready to take off, even when just playing a PSN game.  The PS3 Slim both looks better and supposedly eliminates this problem. 

However, here’s the thing…  If I do go through with this plan, I’m not buying both a new 360 and a new PS3.  It’s going to be one or the other.  So which to choose?  I’m debating the merits of both.

Xbox 360

• Advantages
  • I definitely have a larger library of 360 games to go back to than PS3.
  • While it does cost $50/year, the Xbox Live experience is so incredibly good.  And compared to the PlayStation Network, it’s like going from a Porsche to a Dodge.
  • As I’m a Zune fanboy, love that I can download stuff onto my Zune and easily play it back through my 360.  In addition, Microsoft has said that the 360 will natively support Zune meaning I won’t even have to go through that.
  • Kind of interested in the Kinect.  I doubt that I would get one, but I’m definitely interested in seeing what it could do.  Meanwhile, the PlayStation Move is pretty much DOA with me.
• Disadvantages
  • With no Blu-ray player, getting a 360 would mean that I’d also have to get a Blu-ray player.  While cheaper than a PS3, it’s just something else to clutter my entertainment center.
  • This is debatable, but there’s no good 360 exclusives coming out in the near-term that I’m interested in.  I’m kind of over first-person shooters, and was incredibly disappointed in Halo 3: ODST, so do not have any intention of getting Halo Reach.  And Microsoft’s other big exclusive for 2010 is Fable III and I don’t do RPGs.
  • A purely speculative one, but I think that a new Xbox model is, at most, 2 years away.  I think the Kinect is a stop-gap to tide people over for whatever their new console is with built-in motion support.

PlayStation 3

• Advantages
  • I can use to both play games and watch Blu-rays.
  • PSN is free.
  • Better exclusives.  In 2011 they get Twisted Metal and Infamous 2 (though I’m still very early in Infamous 1, and while I think it’s cool I don’t think it’s anything spectacular).  And while I’m not interested in DCU Online with its subscription price, I could be enticed if they significantly lower the price, include it in the Playstation Plus membership, or offer the game itself for free.  I’m a console game, I’m not used to paying a subscription fee to play a game which I already paid for.
  • My most anticipated game of next year is Portal 2, and according to Valve the PS3 experience with Steam Support will be much better than what the Xbox is getting.
• Disadvantages
  • While the PSN is free, it’s practically unusable.  The interface is crap, you can’t get into games without agreeing to TOS agreements every time, and since I don’t have a headset or chat pad there’s no easy way for me to communicate.  (BTW, putting the chat pad at the top instead of at the bottom like the 360?  Not very ergonomic.)
  • Only PlayStation friend is my roommate…  He hasn’t logged into the PSN in 13 months when he was playing Resistance 2.
  • OMG they need to do something about the system updates!  I’m not going to pay for a PlayStation Plus membership so I can program my PS3 to do the updates when I’m not using it.  So, instead, I have to deal with turning on my PS3 to play a quick game of Super Stardust or run a quick race in GT5 Prologue and finding out that I have to download a firmware update for some feature that I don’t even use that takes 20 minutes to download and install.  By the time it’s done, I’ve either lost interest in playing or no longer have time to.

Even though I think the Blu-ray support and better exclusives are more compelling arguments, I’m leaning towards getting a 360.  After my launch 360 red-ringed, I lived with only my PS3.  That lasted about 5 months before I broke down and got a new 360.  But that was because, like I said earlier, there were no games I was interested in for the PS3 at the time.  So, without starting a flame war, what do you guys think? 

Counterpoint to Kevin Rose’s Thoughts on an Apple iTV

Today I had the opportunity to check out the latest blog post from Digg founder (and Big J man-crush) Kevin Rose on a potential new version of Apple TV called Apple iTV.  While Kev seems to believe that iTV will “change everything”, here’s some thoughts to maybe temper that enthusiasm.

• Internet-Enabled Televisions:  While still not widely available, I think that many people would consider getting an iTV would be the same people who like to stay on the cutting-edge of technology to get an internet-enabled television.  The applications that iTV would most likely offer are those also likely available to those with one of these TVs.  So, why pay $99 for something you already have?
• Pictures/Video Streaming:  A few months ago I turned on my PS3 and had to sit through a firmware update so that Sony could update the photo viewer and all I could think was “What a waste of time?!”  While offered through PlayStation, Xbox 360, Tivo, and many other services, I have only once sat somewhere and watched a photo slideshow on a television.  And that was because I set it up for my stepfather’s 50th birthday back in April as some background entertainment.  I’m not sold on picture streaming being a valuable utility.  It’s like the old carousel slideshow of our generation…  Nobody wants to see it.  Add to it if, as Kevin states, it’s tied with MobileMe then you have to pay an extra $100 a year to maintain an account for the privilege to do something you didn’t want to do any ways.
• Content Providers Won’t Participate:  One killer app that Kevin mentioned was how content providers will launch apps to stream shows through iTV, monetizing their shows by selling them through iTunes or the App Store.  The current gen Apple TV had allowed for buying and streaming stuff purchased on iTunes.  But here’s the thing – even with mass adoption of these types of applications it’ll likely not come anywhere near to recouping the lost revenue from advertising.  There was an article recently on CNET about how Google is trying to line up content for their Google TV as the networks want to protect their affiliates.  And the whole being able to drop your cable/satellite providers…  Yea, cable channels not only make revenue from advertising but also from the subscriber fees they make from those providers.  So, while cable channels will definitely take advantage of a new revenue source, they’re definitely going to limit what’s available to protect the money they make from the cable companies.

Just a couple of thoughts.  Like with the Apple TV, I wouldn’t buy an iTV just because I don’t have a use for it.  I can use my Xbox/PlayStation to rent digital content, stream Netflix, etc.  So, it once again makes you think “Who is Apple targeting with this product or what does it offer that distinguishes it?”  I’m guessing we’ll see when Apple officially announces it, probably some time soon.

Random Thoughts - June 12, 2010

Well, at the end of each of my posts to my blog, I always promise to write more often... Then write up a new post a couple months later. But, this time, I think I will be as I'm going to start learning some webpage programming and will be using my blog as a test page. So, obviously, I will post a link to that as soon as I'm ready to launch.

Comics Review

Being in graduate school, I've noticed that I don't have as much time to watch television. My replacement over the last few months have been comic books. This week, I picked up the new issues of Nemesis, Avengers Academy, and Batman #700. While I haven't had a chance to go through the Batman issue, here's my quick thoughts on the other two.

• Avengers Academy #1: Following the events of Siege (which, by the way, I thought was a much better cross-over event from DC's Blackest Night), the Heroic Age has started in the Marvel U. The superheroes have banded together to help rebuild the Earth that has been torn-apart so recently. To help rebuild the ranks, the superhero team The Avengers, has started a school for teens displaying mutant powers (similar to Professor X's School for Gifted Children). Avengers Academy #1 introduces the first class through the voice of Maddy Berry, the usual awkward teen in a Marvel book who displays her power (being able to evaporate) when tricked by the "mean girls" at her school into thinking the hot boy had a crush on her. She's introduced to her team of "super teens" and instructors at the newly opened Avengers Academy. While this is an introductory issue, it just seems to go down the road that has been travelled time-and-time-again by the X-Men. Marvel really beat the X-Men franchise to death in the '90s with all of its iterations that it's hard to imagine they can do anything new. I'm probably not going to continue following the series, but who knows... It may surprise.
• Nemesis #2: The first Nemesis, which I think came out in April, was a great intro issue. A master supervillain who tours the world matching wits with the best police detectives he can find, just to come out victorious. To announce his arrival in the United States, he kidnaps the president and crashes Air Force One. Issue #2 decides to tell the origins of Nemesis which, in my opinion, diminishes the character and by making revenge his motivation weakens this story arc. However, if you just ignore those first three pages of backstory, the pace matches the first issue as Nemesis wrecks havoc around Washington, D.C. with the police aparently little able to do anything to stop it. But, a great couple last pages makes me excited for what's next.

Screw You Cable

I have been waiting patiently since it was announced for AT&T's U-Verse service to come into my neighborhood. But, lately, I have been seriously considering dropping cable altogether and switching to a completely digital plan. Like many, I have an 47" HDTV in my living room, so when it comes to watching TV on my laptop versus watching on an actual TV, I'm sticking with TV. But, in recent months, I've noticed how I really only watch a select number of channels, and even then, as I mentioned before, I'm not watching much TV to begin with. It may be cheaper for me to ditch my cable and start buying shows individually from like a Zune Marketplace or iTunes. My primary concern was watching sports, but with Sony announcing recently that you can stream MLB.tv content through the PS3, I could then watch any game instead of just the same four teams that Fox/ESPN seem to shove down our throats.

I don't know, has any one else tried? Through my homeowner's association, I will always have access to basic cable for local TV and such. If you're buying just the stuff that you want through Zune Marketplace/iTunes, does it really save you any money? I was hoping that, during Steve Jobs' iPhone conference, he would announce the rumored iTunes subscription program for video (should have known that wasn't going to happen, how long have they had the opportunity to do the same for music like Zune and Rhapsody and passed).

OK, that's it for this post... I'm going to be trying to build up a new blogroll for when I start my new site, which'll hopefully be in a few weeks. Until then, keep a look out here or on my Twitter, @GrandOwl. Have a great weekend.

Special Segment: Umm, Apple... WTF?!

Response to Steve Jobs' Open Letter Regarding Adobe Flash

What's up, Inter-Tubes?!

Yea, I don't blog much any more. But, I do want to take a moment to do a quick post.

I'm a tech nerd, and what got me into technology... My small little Catholic school in Daytona Beach, back when I was in the 1st Grade in 1983, had the money to invest in a small computer lab. And what did we have? Apple IIe. Like many kids of my generation, we were awed by the dancing bear when you got a math problem right or spending a lunch break playing Oregon Trail. Apple Computers were a huge, huge deal. And when my finally got its first computer, I lobbied hard for a Macintosh. But what did we end up getting? An IBM, thus making me the Microsoft fanboy that I am today (to prove that it all comes back around again, my current laptop's a Lenovo, formerly IBM's personal computing division). Like many at the time, my family felt that Apple's were toys but IBM's were computers.

What brought about this image? It wasn't that you couldn't accomplish many things on an Apple. It was that Apple wanted so much control over the things that you did on their machines that developers went to the more open platform offered by DOS and then by Windows. And it wasn't just what you could do on the computers, but also the computers themselves. DOS, to the chagrin of IBM, wasn't a proprietary system... It was available to any computer maker and could be customized to do whatever task that was needed. While Apple computers were usually technologically-superior, it didn't matter if its superiority didn't do anything you wanted it to.

Controlled environment vs. open platform? Hmm... Sounds familiar. Yes, after Steve Jobs resuscitated Apple from near-oblivion, it seems like his original business model may hurt the company once again. Instead of the personal computer platform, Apple is using its dominant position in the mobile and portable devices platform. With the iPod, iPhone, and iPad, Apple has a dominant position when it comes to mobile devices. They use it now to bully those who wish to develop for it. If you want to develop for any of Apple's mobile platforms, you have to cow-tow the Apple line, just as developers had to do in the 1980's with Macs.

Here's the thing... When you create your own world, you can set the terms for those who choose to live in it if you want to. But in an environment such as technology, with so many creative types, they're not going to stand idly by while you set boundaries when they can choose another environment without rules. I believe this is already beginning to happen in the mobile environment. Now that there's a lineup of devices using Google's open-source Android software. While it's limited to phones right now, the talk of their own slates to rival the iPad will likely be out before the holidays. Now, you have once again Apple - with their one device that only does what Apple wants it to do - against a more open system, this time Android available on a variety of different devices and customizable to do what you'd like.

C'mon Apple... You know what you're doing is wrong and it won't stand for much longer. I have an iPhone, and I like it, but I imagine my next phone will have an Android OS. Every time I see the blue Lego when surfing on it, I want to throw the phone across the room. Why would I want to get an iPad for it's great Internet surfing experience when I can't use it to surf the Internet?! I don't use the iPhone capabilities as an iPod, either. Apple's desire to control what's available on the iTunes store and pricing is such a turn-off when you can use Amazon to get a better price or Zune Marketplace to get an unlimited subscription. I'm just saying, it seems like once again your stubbornness will cost you in the end when your pop culture appeal flames-out (which, I believe, it inevitably will).

I'm not here to damn Apple, even as a Microsoft fan... Apple has always proven to be the king of innovation in the tech environment, and one can only imagine what the landscape would be like right now had Apple failed in the 1990's, as they were so close to doing. I just want an open and fair environment for developers and not to be dictated as to what I want by some preppy in a black turtleneck.

P.S. - Gotta love the irony in Jobs' open letter talking about how he refuses to support Flash because it's a completely proprietary property. Hmm...