February 13th, 2010 / 12:49 pm
Snippet
LIFE ISN’T LIKE THAT
The new HBO show about the lives of male hipsterish 20-somethings in New York seriously sucks. (See for yourself.) I hate it on some visceral level already; it seems insidious, evil, in its dishonesty. I hate it the way I feel like I would hate Sex and the City if I were a woman and I lived in New York.
Only unlike Sex & the City, I don’t think this new show is going to be a hit — at all.
reply
based on their physiognomies i’d say they look more like frat boys
reply
That’s such a Miranda thing to say
reply
Yea, that’s just not a very good show.
reply
How well does this TV show depict NYC? How well does it depict NYC in comparison to other movies/TV shows set in NYC? Will people that live in NYC tend to dislike this show more than people who don’t? Will the accuracy of this show’s depiction of NYC affect it’s reception by NYC residents positively or negatively? (I’ve never been to NYC.)
reply
I’m watching the episode right now . . .
The young Black “hustler” on the train . . .
The photograph in the art gallery that says “JAIL” except spelled with a gun . . .
The part when Marko-Marko says he would “tear that ass up.”
The name, Marko-Marko . . .
Insidious is a good word for this, Nick. This crap-television show is presenting levels of culture the same way the movie, “Crash” did. Very poorly.
The odd use of flashbacks (or at least the way they’re executed) is also severely pointless and uninteresting. I’m developing a stomach ulcer. I should probably stop watching this. I don’t even want to wait around for a Nip/Tuck-esque sex scene. I’m just going to stop watching it.
reply
OMG HE’S TRYING TO QUIT SMOKING I CAN TOTES RELATE.
No but seriously. That kid who played the candy-seller on the train is the worst actor ever.
He put actual feeling in his voice during his pitch. Someone should have told him that rule #1
for those kids is to maintain the evenest, robotic monotone at all times.
Only thing they seemed to have gotten right here is the multiple Cam’ron song bites.
And Shannyn Sossamon… but her hair.. really?
reply
How is it valid to call it “dishonest” when it’s a freakin’ TV show? It’s fiction, it’s not filming you and your buddies in your day-to-day life. And it doesn’t have an agenda, it’s entertainment.
reply
February 13th, 2010 / 9:59 pmPaul—
You’re what some people would refer to as an empty (or) empty vessel. You probably listen to Lady Gaga and find her very “unique.” You might also be responsible for the paintings found in a Starbucks Coffee house. You’re probably one of the people that went and saw Avatar on opening day. You might also be the type of person that enjoys stapling packets of paper.
reply
February 13th, 2010 / 10:33 pmm—
You win. You’ve won at art. You like all of the good art and none of the bad art. You have good taste. You are a good and intelligent and sexy person. I want to suck your dick. I want to lick your asshole. What music should I like? Where should I exhibit my art? What movies should I watch? More importantly, what movies should I not watch? What activities are OK to enjoy? How can I be more like you?
reply
February 13th, 2010 / 10:35 pmLincoln—
That’s such a Carrie thing to say.
February 13th, 2010 / 11:11 pmPaul—
funny, a person asked me a similar series of questions the other day. i don’t feel like answering yours though.
February 13th, 2010 / 11:15 pmm—
You win again.
February 14th, 2010 / 12:25 amsteveo2—
hey paul, slow down, six-shooter. I objected to the criticism of the show on the basis of its “dishonesty” because it’s a TV show and not intended to be a cutting-edge reflection of social reality. i hadn’t even watched the show when i made that comment, because it was a valid criticism of nick’s criticism regardless of the show’s quality. having watched 15 minutes of it and then shut it off, it’s a pretty shitty show, but it’s made to be entourage-goes-altbro-in-new-york, so whaddya expect? i think by that standard, it’s still not very good and i’d rather watch entourage, but whatever. i still thinking tuning into something you know you’re going to hate and then crying about how it’s dishonest about your precious lit-hipster-in-new-york lifestyle is pretty lame. but then, white altbros and ladies in new york live to criticize things that are hip enough to watch but not hip enough to meet your exquisite standards. on the internet, naturally. it’s a way of life!
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 4:29 amNick Antosca—
Oh, shut the fuck up, sulky troll. “i hadn’t even watched the show when i made that comment, because it was a valid criticism of nick’s criticism regardless of the show’s quality.” No it wasn’t. Your criticism is that it’s irrelevant to call a TV show “dishonest,” and what makes it irrelevant is the fact that it’s a TV show. I’m curious why that is. Because TV shows are a lower form of art and therefore should not be held to standards like “truth” (i.e. does what is clearly intended to be taken as a realistic portrayal of a milieu and the nuances of human interaction within that milieu actual reflect something closely approximating reality; does it feel authentic given that one of its goals is clearly the appearance of authenticity, and the selling of a certain lifestyle to a specific audience) or because no art form of any kind should be held to that standard?
If you puzzle through the above sentences, you may come closer to an understanding of how it’s “valid to call it ‘dishonest’ when it’s a freakin’ TV show.” What a stupid question.
February 14th, 2010 / 8:05 pmStu—
Is a guy waking up an insect or a breast an authentic thing? Does that happen every day? Or even sometimes? Or is it the little observations and expression of human thoughts/feelings what counts? Is metaphor an authentic thing? Is it more authentic when only a few people can relate or when many can? I don’t know. I mean, I’ve read stories/watched movies about boring people doing boring things. It MIGHT be authentic, but does that improve its quality or dull it?
I couldn’t even get past the opening credits of that show because of all the “dolla dolla bill ya’ll” bling shit. Maybe that is authentic to those who “hustle.” But it’s not interesting to me because I can listen to “rap” or walk down the street to see that. In that context, it’s not an act and it’s not scripted.
February 15th, 2010 / 1:22 amNick Antosca—
I think we can all agree that Kafka and Roth weren’t selling their stories as representations of “reality.”
February 14th, 2010 / 12:31 amsteveo2—
oh, and PAUL, you’re probably the kind of bro whose website plays a bunch of way rad youtube clips at once to create a Zaireeka of found-sound for your eyez and cerebellum! and you prolly labeled it “these conduits overlap my mid-brain.” you are one precious, precious douche, paul, lol…..
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 12:49 amPaul—
You’re not very good with the whole “formation of sentences thing,” are you?
Your objection is nonsensical. Why can’t TV portray real life accurately? What is wrong with that? Is entertainment supposed to be consistently unremarkable and bland? I’m glad you enjoy entourage, but I really don’t care about the kind of television you enjoy. Who is steveo2? What does your response to my response say other than the fact that you enjoy the term “altbro” and that you listen to The Flaming Lips often enough to make a pretty lame reference?
At least you know I like seeing my name spelled in all-caps. It makes me smile one hell of an exquisite smile.
February 14th, 2010 / 12:49 amPaul—
Thanks for checking out my blog! :)
February 14th, 2010 / 6:27 amstephen—
Try this sentence formation on for size, paul: YOU ARE A PRETENTIOUS DOUCHEBAG. I WAS ABLE TO SHIT ON YOUR BLOG QUITE WITTILY AFTER WITNESSING IT’S SPLENDOR FOR TWO SECONDS OR LESS. I PULLED THAT ZAIREEKA REFERENCE OUT OF MY ASS THE FOLLOWING SECOND BECAUSE SHITTING ON YOUR PRETENTION IS AS EASY AS BREATHING AIR. It’s a great reference, because I’m doing 2 things at once: 1) Mocking your silly website with a reference from your own milieu (pretentious, bullshit Flaming Lips album whose aural functionality is similar to your website’s, as you well know) 2) Disproving your assumption that I’m an uncultured shmuck by your standards just because I dare to question the wisdom in picking on easy cultural targets from the ivory tower of Truth in Art. I don’t frequent Starbucks or contribute paintings to their walls; I have yet to watch Avatar and have no interest; and, as it happens, Lady Gaga’s persona and visual aesthetic IS unique, even if her music is derivative of Britney Spears, Madonna, and many others. So you see, I’m Stephen, I will refrain from slaughtering you under a pseudonym in the future, and maybe you can do me the favor of eating shit.
February 14th, 2010 / 12:33 pmPaul—
Is that what just happened? Did you slaughter me? Did you really give the old jab and punch? Did you punish me Stephen?
“Lady Gaga’s persona and visual aesthetic IS unique”
RIght, Stephen. She writes one lousy song intended for piano and then it becomes “Hmm, maybe I can be just like Elton John now and wear ridiculous costumes that coincidentally match a custom-made piano that will be equally ridiculous–in fact, maybe I’ll have a different custom-made piano every time I sing the fucking song! Maybe I’ll even perform with Elton John on Grammy night! Thank you for making me famous my little monsters! Thank you!”
I pity the fact that you find Lady Gaga “unique”–I feel that says enough about your character. I feel like you haven’t been exposed to much–or anything worth discussing. I pity the fact you’re still talking about The Flaming Lips. We get it–ZAIREEKA is a fun word to say. I pity the fact that you accuse me of being pretentious just for sharing an opinion that is pretty damn accurate. I pity the fact that you’re so invested in cheap, tasteless television that a simple claim of “dishonesty” has your panties in a bind. I pity your blog, which doesn’t seem to inspire many strangers on the web to comment and somehow connect with you and your stories about houses and people constructing houses (you writer, you). I pity your unwarranted hate for my blog.
But most of all, Stephen Tully Dierks, I pity the fool and only the fool. So today, and today only, you have my pity.
February 14th, 2010 / 2:53 amMatt Cozart—
actually i’m starting to think outright dismissal is not the appropriate response to lady gaga. she intrigues me. i suggest looking closer.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 4:06 amPaul—
There’s just no substance. It’s a very tired and used “intrigue.” We’ve all seen the whole blasé Warholian act before. She is famous and she enjoys fame–that’s really all there is inside the knock-off sock-puppet that is Lady Gaga. She makes one hypocritical statement after another. She says the same line of garbage in every interview–the whole my music is for misunderstood youths etc. The gay community absolutely adores her–considers her an advocate for LBGTQ persons–”why?” is the question. She says nice things about gay people? Okay, well, that’s just peachy, Gaga. That doesn’t mean you change the lyrics to “Imagine;” replacing them with something like “and only Matthew in the sky.” What the fuck does that even mean? I understand it’s a reference to Matthew Shepard, but really? “Only Matthew in the sky?” He’s the only dead gay person in the sky?? Really??
I think “looking closer” isn’t the answer. Outright dismissal is. She writes catchy songs, but there’s just nothing going on in that noggin of hers–except surging multiple personalities and a very, very desperate hope to be the next Andy Warhol. Maybe she can do for Kermit the Frog what Andy did for soup cans.
February 14th, 2010 / 4:32 amNick Antosca—
I like her style. I like the videos for “Poker Face” and “Bad Romance.”
I think her talk about being Warholian or whatever is both as laughable and as oddly endearing as Sasha Grey’s talk about being an existentialist porn star.
February 14th, 2010 / 7:51 pmStu—
Did you see “The Girlfriend Experience?” Complete trainwreck of a movie.
February 15th, 2010 / 11:16 amNick Antosca—
I saw it. I wouldn’t go as far as to say trainwreck, but I was bored.
February 13th, 2010 / 10:30 pmLincoln—
That’s such a Charlotte thing to say.
reply
February 13th, 2010 / 10:57 pmdavid erlewine—
You’re totally Mr. Bigging it right now.
reply
Thanks.
reply
You win again, Paul. You are a winner.
reply
February 13th, 2010 / 11:17 pmPaul—
i know. i don’t need you to tell me that.
reply
February 13th, 2010 / 11:20 pmPaul—
does this mean you’re a supporter of the Gaga, m? or a supporter of Starbucks Coffee house art? which of these things have offended you?
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 12:42 pmm—
I presume you mean ’support’ in a financial sense? I have not purchased any of Lady Gaga’s music. I have said nice things about Lady Gaga to my friends. I have watched her videos on Youtube. I have now obliquely defended her on the internet. I do not patronize Starbucks Coffee or the art therein.
I am not offended by the specific examples. I’m offended by the spirit of your post. You are perpetuating the false dichotomy between ‘good art’ and ‘bad art,’ between ‘commercial/mainstream/populist art’ and ‘independent/academic/high- art,’ between ‘entertainment’ and ‘art.’ These are all cultural myths (which exist to let people like you condescend other people and feel a little better about themselves). Lady Gaga is no better or worse than Schoenberg or whatever shit it is that you like. (I suppose you wouldn’t want to say because it would open yourself up to possible criticism.) ‘How to Make It in America’ isn’t any better or worse than ‘Twin Peaks’ or fucking ‘Citizen Kane.’ That’s the thing. No matter what it is that you like, there are going to be a lot of people who think it’s shit. There can be no consensus. And no ‘cultural authority’ is legitimate. What are your credentials? You went to college? You think of yourself as being ’smarter than average’ and ‘having a preternatural aesthetic sense’? Your ideology and taste are culturally, economically, and historically contingent. To place every cultural object on a one-dimensional spectrum from ‘good’ to ‘bad’ is idiotically reductive. It does a disservice to both the ‘art’ and the audience.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 1:11 pmPaul—
You’re right, M (I feel like James Bond when I write that–cute pseudonym). I understand that human beings use ideology to make themselves feel better or worse about issues and topics–thus the millions of people who believe something referred to as “God” is watching them every day and we should be thankful and gracious to him for bringing us into this world. That’s cute and all–heaven and the clouds and shit–that’s very cute. However, if we’re going to play the ideology game, is not this little epiphany of yours your own ideological (and hypocritical) method of constructing a level of omniscience/cultural authority greater than the level of omniscience/cultural authority you have so eagerly assigned to me? I’m very sorry if you believe it is wrong to critique art and assign different works of art a label of “bad” or “good.” You and I realize that society creates ideologies to thereby ensure the continuing existence of social relations and social theory. Woe me for critiquing the ideological state apparatuses in this world of societal mechanisms I was involuntarily born into. Woe me for trying to reach beyond the standard humanist notion of free will.
February 14th, 2010 / 1:14 pmPaul—
And here, M! Have a grocery list of musical artists that I enjoy! I hope you can use this list to bring further shame upon me! Please tell me how much I lose at this game of yours, M! Please, I beg you!
Arcade Fire, Bob Dylan, Grizzly Bear, Radiohead, Buddy Rich, Eddie Bo, Modest Mouse, M83, Man Man, St. Vincent, White Williams, Apes & Androids, Outkast, The Killers, David Bowie, Brian Eno, Atlas Sound, Miles Davis, Lou Reed & The Velvet Underground, Tom Petty, The Mountain Goats, Sigur Ros, The Alan Parsons Project, Electric Light Orchestra, Meat Loaf, Billy Joel, Sufjan Stevens, Belle & Sebastian, Rufus Wainwright, Pink Floyd, The Magnetic Fields, Spoon, The Knife, Girl Talk, Beirut, Phoenix, The Rolling Stones, Simon & Garfunkel, Smashing Pumpkins, Violent Femmes
February 14th, 2010 / 1:35 pmTrey—
I like Outkast.
February 14th, 2010 / 2:06 pmryan—
“That’s the thing. No matter what it is that you like, there are going to be a lot of people who think it’s shit. There can be no consensus.”
This sort of aesthetic relativism is itself an ideological claim, and (I’m guessing) is likely more historically/culturally contingent than what you’re accusing Paul of. It is the modern drive toward generous cultural relativism gone into overdrive.
Isn’t it kind of absurd to say that personal taste is -all- there is, when it comes to making aesthetic judgements? Even taking for granted that our aesthetic preferences are in large part culturally contingent, is there -no- value at all in me—me, working within my own culturally contingent aesthetic value-system—still attempting to make fine aesthetic distinction within that system? The leap from ‘culture in large part fixes your aesthetic standards’ to ‘therefore, judgement according to those standards is worthless; personal taste is everything.’ I think it’s possibly to asses one artwork as better than another w/o said judgement devolving into ‘hoohaaaa, watch as I flount my cultural superiority!!!’
February 14th, 2010 / 2:08 pmryan—
whoa, excuse the mistakes. ‘flaunt’ and ‘the leap . . . seems odd.’
February 14th, 2010 / 2:36 pmPaul—
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWX-ub3thjE
February 14th, 2010 / 10:16 pmstephen—
Paul, despite having been your enemy combatant in a most preposterous online cockfight (paging Anger Management), I will nonetheless compliment your taste in music.
February 14th, 2010 / 11:10 pmmimi—
……enemy combatant preposterous cockfight Anger nonetheless taste.
February 13th, 2010 / 11:25 pmPaul—
at least tell me what i win
reply
Did anyone else see Herve Villechaize blazing through here a little while ago? I’m quite sure he was urinating in the cloakroom earlier, but then, he’s always been known to sing a Singapore Sling (and hop-chase from the bottom of his Guildenstern to the top of his Rosenkrantz).
562 YEARS AND 5 WEEKS AGO IVAN THE TERRIBLE BECAME CZAR OF RUSSIA.
J.A.C. (Jackass and Co.)
reply
Hey, Nick, watch what you say about Sasha Grey. She would drain your pipes and then forget about you before her last cigarette of the day. She understands existentialism as well as you think you do. Get this, Antipasta: Her body is the abyss. I’m sure you think you’re mean enough, but you’re not. Never pick on a girl twice your size.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 8:44 pmMark C—
This paragraph is fucking amazing. I’ve read it about 30 times already.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 10:01 pmVin Diesel—
Thanks, Mark. Much appreciated.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 11:13 pmmimi—
watch say drain forget
She understands body is the abyss.
I’m sure you think you’re twice your size.
reply
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 11:26 pmVin Diesel—
Poopoo
Peepee
Caca
Doodee
Boogee
Boobee
Rubbee
Meemoo
Daadee
reply
February 15th, 2010 / 6:08 amVin Diesel—
watch the size (twice)
reply
February 15th, 2010 / 12:57 pmmimi—
drain twice
Oh, and Nick: television isn’t art, you dummy. That’s lazy thinking. It’s a communication system based on the extension of the eyes and ears. You want to think it as art to justify your indulgence. Art activates you. Television turns you off. And there’s nothing wrong with being in a prolonged alpha wave state. That’s what drugs are for. But according to you, the Darvocet I use for my headache is on the same continuum with Dos Passos, Peckinpah, and Supertramp. Nice try, Gino Spaghettio.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 6:20 amScott—
yeah, and books are a communication system based on the extension of the eyes alone, that puts tv one up on books, right?
(fuck you)
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 1:25 pmVin Diesel—
Actually, books are a communication system based on the extension of the consciousness.
Dummy II.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 9:20 amj.a.c.—
Vin,
Say what you want about Nick, but he definitely knows how to roll the dice where auto insurance and/or best chicken masala is concerned.
J.A.C. (Jeneralizing And Comparing)
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 1:37 pmNick Antosca—
Lazy thinking is dismissing art b/c of the medium. According to you, Twin Peaks isn’t art. Same w/ Sopranos, Mad Men, Twilight Zone, Duel (Spielberg TV movie), The Shield, The Wire, The Simpsons, Six Feet Under, Deadwood, etc etc. Television was arguably the healthiest artistic medium of the last decade (as DVD allowed long-form storytelling to really flourish).
reply
February 15th, 2010 / 6:02 amVin Diesel—
You watch way too much television. And I’m sure you have a lot of friends, too. So between watching all of your shows, hanging out, going to work, cranking the machine, sleeping, and eating, when do you have the time? I mean, pretend I’m interviewing you, Toscaninny. Pretend you’re doing a junket. Your new book just came out. Everyone is saying you’re the next Tristan Egolf. Your publicist tells you to meet me at The Hen House for chat and business. I show up late. I’m wearing a fake beard, sunglasses, and a Panama Jack. With breath that smells like raw sewage. I’m aggressive and condescending. I question your work ethic. I call you a spoiled brat. And then, when I feel you’re being dismissive, I splash my seven and seven all over your smirk. Would you still be nice to me? I think you would.
reply
February 15th, 2010 / 11:13 amNick Antosca—
Don’t be a piece of shit re: Egolf. Good guy, too soon.
Everyone seems so unilateral on this thread. Stephen, don’t you realize it’s about colostomy bags. Either that or Juan de Fuca and throwing an old lady in a shopping cart.
Nevertheless, happyvalentinesday!
J.A.C. (Jesus Adores Cards) ~ Manchmal
reply
Will someone here familiarize with the players in this blog. I don’t have enough time to service the elevator shaft, or mount the thinktank in Brescia.
J.A.C. (Just Actually Came)
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 3:14 pmLincoln—
That’s such a Samantha thing to say.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 4:37 pmj.a.c.—
What does that have to do with supply/demand or the pricepoint of penispumps at a Klan rally? You’ll get yer lousy cut regardless, Tus-.
Hal “The Halinator” Sipowski,
President (of) J.A.C. (Joint Augmenter Co.)
and something that rhymes
with Loan Sharks
Unite….
reply
Hello all,
I just had an epiphany. Y’know… me being brandnew here and all. I suspect some of you have written me off as a troll, and/or a dine-and-dash-slash-swipe-the-old-man’s-credit-card kinda guy. Well, it’s not so. I happen to be wearing these gravycolored highwaters for a reason, and my bad haircut doesn’t mean I don’t know how to gas the proverbial bunsonburner, or charm highway traffic by disguising myself as a werewolf and spinning a cardboard arrow that says WE BUY GOLD. I do. I just don’t do it often. And I haven’t done it yet. Here.
J.A.C. (Jerseygirls Are Crap) & trolls have feelings too.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 1:47 pmNick Antosca—
Welcome, J.A.C.
reply
February 14th, 2010 / 2:26 pmj.a.c.—
Thanks Nick,
I promise to do my bygum best re: joggling the handorgan (non-freudian) and hanging red lanterns in the sky.
J.A.C. (Junk-Addled Claptrapper)
reply
[...] on JG Ballard’s artistic legacy. Moot at Ted. Empty Mass Ave reveals much about my city. How to Make it In America (All you need to know about this show is they try absinthe by 15:31.) Or maybe not. Martha Plimpton [...]