I'm back by popular demand. It's also about time for my annual post. So, to announce the rebirth of this blog (this year, anyway), I begin with a funeral.
Today is the funeral of Helen Andelin. Here's the link to her obituary.
I'm not quite sure what to say about her. How about this: Helen Andelin formed the popular base for every American-pro-stay-at-home-wife-self-help-book since the 1960s. Seriously. She's pretty big stuff when it comes to gender politics and ethics in America in the last fifty years.
In the ethics course I taught at Utah Valley University, I used to cover selections from her book Fascinating Womanhood just before I covered selections from Simone de Beauvoir's book Second Sex. Students would typically be so enraged at Andelin that introducing de Beauvoir (a fairly radical icon of the feminist movement) seemed an almost welcome transition. I should also mention that Andelin was Mormon and had a lot of ties to Utah (as her obit mentions). One of the first semesters I used Andelin's book, I had the fortune of having one of Andelin's granddaughters as a student in my class. As a gift near the end of the semester, this student had her grandmother autograph a copy of Fascinating Womanhood for me. The inscription, in Andelin's elegant cursive script, addresses me by name and then reads, "May the Light of Truth burn forever in your heart." It was honestly a very sweet and sincere gesture. Agree or disagree with Andelin, nobody can question her sincerity.
However, lest I be misunderstood in this post, I disagree with much of what Andelin writes in terms of gender relationships. I greatly disagree with her. Andelin was part of a larger cultural effort in America to reclaim what she saw as timeless family values. The problem, of course, is that her values are not timeless (nor were they ever especially timely). Andelin was part of a post-WWII American resurgence (insurgence?) of the Cult of Domesticity. Think of the rise of Donna Reed and the Cleavers and such. One of the best music essays about this conceit is the song Somewhere That's Green from Little Shop of Horrors. Certainly most of Andelin's female Mormon pioneer ancestors (who initially settled Utah, worked the fields, owned land, and ran businesses) would have found Andelin's gender ethics odd and out of synch with the needs of their frontier life. Certainly many Utah Mormon women eventually embraced a gender ethic similar to Andelin's, but it was only extensive after the Utah Territory (and later State) was influenced more by main-stream American culture (which only strengthens my conviction that many, if not most, of the dysfunctions in American Mormon culture come from the mingling of American popular Christianity with Mormon theology [I hasten to add that the dysfunctions in our culture tend to self-correct the more that members of Church actually apply the principles they hear in General Conference]).
But, enough has been written about Andelin in other places. And I don't want to demonize her on the day of her funeral. I will say this: today marks the passing of a giant. Everyone can agree with that even if they disagree on what kind of giant she was (Titan? Leviathan? Kraken?). I close this anniversary blog post with some excerpts from Andelin's book. Warning: what follows is not intended for men to read, and I honestly don't want women reading it seriously either. Cheers.
"Since the cornerstone of woman's happiness with her man is to be loved, the essential aim of this book is to teach those principles which she must apply in arousing man's deepest feelings. Love is not reserved for the young, the single, nor the beautiful. It is reserved for those who arouse it in man. If man does not love with heart and soul, it is entirely the woman's fault."
"I am going to try to create this ideal in your mind, the ideal woman, from a man's point of view. You cannot work for a goal if you do not know what that goal is. You must have an image, or a mental picture of the woman you ought to be – the kind a man wants."
"The most pleasant sensation a real man can experience is his consciousness of the power to give his manly care and protection. Rob him of this sensation of superior strength and ability and you rob him of his manliness."
"What happens when the average red-blooded man comes in contact with an obviously able intellectual and competent woman manifestly independent of any help a mere man can give and capable of meeting him or defeating him upon his own ground? He simply doesn't feel like a man any longer. In the presence of such strength and ability in a mere woman, he feels like a futile, ineffectual imitation of a man; it is the most uncomfortable and humiliating sensation a man can experience; so that the woman who arouses it becomes repugnant to him."
"How Do We Acquire Feminine Dependency? . . . Prove your dependency by the following methods: (A) Stop doing the more difficult masculine tasks and duties. (B) Retain some of the lesser ones to begin with to prove your dependency."
"(A) Eliminating the Man's Work. I refer to any masculine responsibility -such as mowing the lawn, painting, carrying heavy boxes, carpentry, earning a portion of the living, making major decisions, handling the money problems and worries, making a long distance trip alone, braving the dark, facing the creditors, and repairing the furnace. . . . 'But,' you again might say, 'If I do not do them and he does not what will happen? Someone must do these things.' But must they? Must the lawn be mowed and the kitchen painted and the battles won at the expense of feminine charm? Woman must learn to turn her back completely to these tasks unless through widowhood it becomes a pressing emergency. Nor should you become critical of your husband if he fails to perform his masculine duties. They are his to do or neglect as he wishes. If this failure on his part is difficult for you to accept, eliminate your critical attitude by saying to yourself, 'Have I performed my tasks well today? Was I dressed and well groomed before breakfast? Did I serve my husband well prepared meals on time today ? Is my house clean and orderly? Have I been patient with my children? And am I loving and understanding of my husband?' After you have answered these questions then ask, 'Do I have the right to feel resentful because he neglects his duties?'"
"(B) Be inefficient in masculine tasks. Deliberately retain some of the lesser masculine duties and do them inefficiently to prove your dependency. If it is the furnace that needs fixing replace some of the parts backwards or fail to get it running at all. If you paint -miss some parts and if you install a towel rack - fail to attach it level. If you must make decisions, be fluttering and indecisive. Don't feel deceitful about doing this. Women are supposed to be inferior in the masculine duties. If you are not it is because you have taken on unnatural capability. I will illustrate how this can be done by the following examples:"
"A girl who had been doing the manly chores took her first step towards proving her helplessness by the following: She attached a paper cup dispenser on the wall upside down. When her husband came home he said, 'Say, this isn't on right! Why did you mount it upside down?' Then she said, 'Oh, how do you tell which is right side up?' He immediately took out the screw driver and mounted it right. Another woman built a wooden planter box but she failed to saw the boards straight. When her husband saw it he was amused. Was he ashamed of her inferior work? No! He was delighted, for it made him feel superior."
"Remember that by nature you are not capable."
"What is meant by the Biblical Statement, 'Except ye become as a little child'? Doesn't it imply that little children have qualities which are precious, which we would do well to copy ? Child-like-ness is one of the most charming qualities in the entire philosophy of Fascinating Womanhood. There is no other quality which will do more to emphasize the human side of you. Therefore it is extremely fascinating to men. Child-like-ness is an extreme girlishness. It is a quality of sauciness, spunk, innocence, trustfulness and tenderness all mixed into one. It is a changefulness of emotion, from joyfulness to innocent anger. It is the charming qualities of a little girl."
"What are the emotions which we communicate to our husbands? They are anger, hurt, disappointment, sympathy, tenderness and joy. If you want to be fascinating and solve many of your daily marriage problems, you will learn this child-like art of communication. What is child-like anger? It is the charming and showy anger, spunk, or sauciness of a little girl. There is no better school for learning child-like anger than watching the antics of little children, especially little girls who have been spoiled by too much loving. They are so trusting, so sincere, so innocent and yet so piquant and outspoken that they are often teased into anger. They are too innocent to feel hate, jealousy, resentment, and the uglier emotions. When such a child is teased she doesn't respond with some hideous sarcasm. Instead she stamps her foot and shakes her curls and pouts. She gets adorably angry at herself because her efforts to respond are impotent. Finally she switches off and threatens never to speak to you again, then glances back at you over her shoulder to see if you thought she really meant it, only to stamp her foot in impatience when she sees that you are not the least bit fooled."
"The last quality of child-likeness which I would like to teach you is that of appearance. I mean by this especially your clothes and to some extent your grooming. You certainly need not have child-like appearance all of the time, but some of it adds a dash and variety to your appearance that is refreshing. . . . Young girls always keep up with the hair styles of the present day. . . . To achieve the most girlish appearance in dress, visit a shop for little girls and study their clothes. . . . If you think it a bit ridiculous for grown women to wear these things, try them in your own home and let your husband be the judge. He might not like them to be worn in. public, but he will love them at home and for informal occasions."
"Remember, if you are to be loved and treated like a woman, you must make him feel like a man."
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Authenticity is the great trial of agency or free will. To reject mere existence and to embrace authentic existence is the test. To merely follow the crowd and to merely reject the crowd are both the same activity. Conversely, authentically following the crowd is the same as authentically rejecting the crowd.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
is my thesis about
Well, the birth mother chose another couple. My wife and I dived into our vacation in Seattle as consolation. Vacationing - binge drinking in massive gulps with no hangover. And Seattle offeres a lot to vacationers. The zoo, the underground, the world's largest international film festival, the Folklife music festival (haven't seen that much pot openly smoked since the upper levels of the busses in Liverpool). Grand fun.
On a different note, I'm defending my thesis tomorrow. Here's a quick poem I scribbled during a boring session at the conference two days ago. Don't like it, but I'm out of practice. Cheers.
At those parties
typically with family
or at least among those who spend their days
in dutiful diligence
or at least get paid for practicality
so practical in fact that they wonder
just what in tarnation
I do
with my days
in academic abstraction
indeed the fact that
I abstract may be the only
thing they
know abstractly
so at those parties with a glass half
full and flanked by family
or friends just as estranged
from graduate school as
they sometimes ask
what is your thesis about
I suspect
this may stem from
the drive for small talk
when, of course, nothing
is greater to grad students
whose souls long slain
rot on the altars of
committee feedback
not wanting to offend them
with any obvious
dissertation for dummies
or offend myself
with anything less than
the bodily fluids
I’ll never recover
lost to that ungodly thing
so I tell them with a smile
my thesis is about three fourths of an inch
of unsullied obfuscation
it’s also about the most horrific waste
of my life – I’ll never see those hours again
but it’s also about the loveliest object
in all of odd creation
and yet
it’s also about the most useless piece
of appendix
more impractical than cable TV
and still
my thesis is about the greatest hope I have
of paving
that ephemeral path to sweet, holy medical benefits
yes, ultimately,
my thesis is about the most intimate
of relationships
(but not quite the
most
thank goodness
and my wife)
and so much more
is my thesis about
On a different note, I'm defending my thesis tomorrow. Here's a quick poem I scribbled during a boring session at the conference two days ago. Don't like it, but I'm out of practice. Cheers.
At those parties
typically with family
or at least among those who spend their days
in dutiful diligence
or at least get paid for practicality
so practical in fact that they wonder
just what in tarnation
I do
with my days
in academic abstraction
indeed the fact that
I abstract may be the only
thing they
know abstractly
so at those parties with a glass half
full and flanked by family
or friends just as estranged
from graduate school as
they sometimes ask
what is your thesis about
I suspect
this may stem from
the drive for small talk
when, of course, nothing
is greater to grad students
whose souls long slain
rot on the altars of
committee feedback
not wanting to offend them
with any obvious
dissertation for dummies
or offend myself
with anything less than
the bodily fluids
I’ll never recover
lost to that ungodly thing
so I tell them with a smile
my thesis is about three fourths of an inch
of unsullied obfuscation
it’s also about the most horrific waste
of my life – I’ll never see those hours again
but it’s also about the loveliest object
in all of odd creation
and yet
it’s also about the most useless piece
of appendix
more impractical than cable TV
and still
my thesis is about the greatest hope I have
of paving
that ephemeral path to sweet, holy medical benefits
yes, ultimately,
my thesis is about the most intimate
of relationships
(but not quite the
most
thank goodness
and my wife)
and so much more
is my thesis about
Thursday, May 22, 2008
I'm back
Okay, I’m back.
And now for something completely different, here’s an update of my life.
My grandmother (mom’s mom) died recently. The funeral was this last Friday in Kanarraville (just south of Nowhere). So many relatives tried cramming into my grandmother’s tiny house that my wife and I ended up on cots in a tent in the back yard – that first night, my wife actually finally ended up in the back seat of our car at about 2AM because she found the cot too narrow for her to sleep on her side, the floor of the tent too cold, and the floor in the house too crowded with snoring bodies… we found an air mattress the following evening. I enjoyed the funeral more than I thought I would – honest and touching (an almost impossible balance on any occasion much less a funeral, but it happened). And I thoroughly enjoyed visiting with my country mice relatives who are my favorite relatives to spend time with. The afternoon after the funeral, we hiked a narrow canyon in which most of the trail is in a stream bed – soggy fun.
My wife and I are trying to adopt (to inform any of the three people who read this blog who didn’t already know that). On Sunday as I stepped down from the stand after sacrament meeting, a friend of ours at church button-holed me and told me about a sister of a friend of hers… long story short, we met a birthmother on Sunday afternoon. She gave birth on Saturday to a healthy baby boy. She has interviewed three couples that we know of (including us) and she is working through a case worker through LDS Family Services. My wife and I really like this birthmother; she’s someone we totally feel like we could get along with and it wouldn’t be awkward at all to transition into an open adoption with her baby. As of yesterday afternoon, though, she had yet to pick a couple. Every time the phone rings, my heart dances with my uvula. We’re trying not to get too hopeful: the other two couples are apparently more closely connected to her family. Among other things, this interview has awakened my wife and me to the fact that we had next to zero supplies to bring a baby home to. So we spent some time shopping to get some basics – a few clothes, a few bottles with formula, some new-born diapers, and a carseat to actually carry a baby home in – just enough to last the first few days after a baby gets placed with us. We hope it will happen soon.
But until then, we’re keeping busy, which is good to keep our minds from obsessing about not having a baby yet.
So, this coming weekend, my wife and I are flying to Seattle. Ostensibly, this trip is for me to present part of my MA thesis at the Rhetoric Society of America conference. In preparation, I’m trying to figure out how much of the conference I can ditch so we can enjoy Seattle a bit for the weekend. I’ve already picked out some restaurants downtown that look good (and affordable). Of course, if the birthmother calls anytime before our plane takes off on Friday, we’re canceling the trip.
After that, I’m defending my thesis on Wednesday, May 28. I’ve gone up and down with my thesis. My relationship with my thesis really smacks of an illicit affair. I began the relationship excitedly – almost furtively – as I realized that not much had been written about the specific subjects I researched. A flurry of rendezvous followed which distracted from other personal concerns while I compiled research and wrote the darn thing. Arguments followed – with my thesis and other facets of my life – as my thesis threatened to consume even the normal parts of my life. Now, as the relationship comes to a close, I find myself largely at peace with the whole thing. Perhaps I’ll look back on this phase of my life with nostalgia and relief: it’s been fun and it nearly capsized me… Now, to do this again in a few years, just more intensely with a PhD dissertation.
Two days after my thesis defense, my wife and I will drive to Indiana to try to find a house around Purdue University. We’ll stay a week during which we hope to talk to a lender, find a house, make an offer, and start the long paper work process (which we hope we can complete long distance from Utah). Two nights ago, my wife and I took a community ed course on first-time home buying. I wish I had other non-cliched words, but the whole process of buying a first home simultaneously scares and excites me.
When we get back from Indiana, I’ll start teaching my very last sections of Honors 150 at BYU and Ethics at UVU. It really feels like the end of an era…
We drive out of Utah to move everything to Indiana on August 15.
Okay, so the blog. I have some ideas that have ceased to ruminate in my brain, so I will make sure they get out in digital form here. I aim to have weekly posts from here on out.
And now for something completely different, here’s an update of my life.
My grandmother (mom’s mom) died recently. The funeral was this last Friday in Kanarraville (just south of Nowhere). So many relatives tried cramming into my grandmother’s tiny house that my wife and I ended up on cots in a tent in the back yard – that first night, my wife actually finally ended up in the back seat of our car at about 2AM because she found the cot too narrow for her to sleep on her side, the floor of the tent too cold, and the floor in the house too crowded with snoring bodies… we found an air mattress the following evening. I enjoyed the funeral more than I thought I would – honest and touching (an almost impossible balance on any occasion much less a funeral, but it happened). And I thoroughly enjoyed visiting with my country mice relatives who are my favorite relatives to spend time with. The afternoon after the funeral, we hiked a narrow canyon in which most of the trail is in a stream bed – soggy fun.
My wife and I are trying to adopt (to inform any of the three people who read this blog who didn’t already know that). On Sunday as I stepped down from the stand after sacrament meeting, a friend of ours at church button-holed me and told me about a sister of a friend of hers… long story short, we met a birthmother on Sunday afternoon. She gave birth on Saturday to a healthy baby boy. She has interviewed three couples that we know of (including us) and she is working through a case worker through LDS Family Services. My wife and I really like this birthmother; she’s someone we totally feel like we could get along with and it wouldn’t be awkward at all to transition into an open adoption with her baby. As of yesterday afternoon, though, she had yet to pick a couple. Every time the phone rings, my heart dances with my uvula. We’re trying not to get too hopeful: the other two couples are apparently more closely connected to her family. Among other things, this interview has awakened my wife and me to the fact that we had next to zero supplies to bring a baby home to. So we spent some time shopping to get some basics – a few clothes, a few bottles with formula, some new-born diapers, and a carseat to actually carry a baby home in – just enough to last the first few days after a baby gets placed with us. We hope it will happen soon.
But until then, we’re keeping busy, which is good to keep our minds from obsessing about not having a baby yet.
So, this coming weekend, my wife and I are flying to Seattle. Ostensibly, this trip is for me to present part of my MA thesis at the Rhetoric Society of America conference. In preparation, I’m trying to figure out how much of the conference I can ditch so we can enjoy Seattle a bit for the weekend. I’ve already picked out some restaurants downtown that look good (and affordable). Of course, if the birthmother calls anytime before our plane takes off on Friday, we’re canceling the trip.
After that, I’m defending my thesis on Wednesday, May 28. I’ve gone up and down with my thesis. My relationship with my thesis really smacks of an illicit affair. I began the relationship excitedly – almost furtively – as I realized that not much had been written about the specific subjects I researched. A flurry of rendezvous followed which distracted from other personal concerns while I compiled research and wrote the darn thing. Arguments followed – with my thesis and other facets of my life – as my thesis threatened to consume even the normal parts of my life. Now, as the relationship comes to a close, I find myself largely at peace with the whole thing. Perhaps I’ll look back on this phase of my life with nostalgia and relief: it’s been fun and it nearly capsized me… Now, to do this again in a few years, just more intensely with a PhD dissertation.
Two days after my thesis defense, my wife and I will drive to Indiana to try to find a house around Purdue University. We’ll stay a week during which we hope to talk to a lender, find a house, make an offer, and start the long paper work process (which we hope we can complete long distance from Utah). Two nights ago, my wife and I took a community ed course on first-time home buying. I wish I had other non-cliched words, but the whole process of buying a first home simultaneously scares and excites me.
When we get back from Indiana, I’ll start teaching my very last sections of Honors 150 at BYU and Ethics at UVU. It really feels like the end of an era…
We drive out of Utah to move everything to Indiana on August 15.
Okay, so the blog. I have some ideas that have ceased to ruminate in my brain, so I will make sure they get out in digital form here. I aim to have weekly posts from here on out.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
mouths on the bus
This is another bus piece. I scribbled this on the bus today pretty much as you find it below. The woman I mention is on southbound 830 bus that picks up at UVSC at 9:53 AM every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. She rides to the mall transit station to start driving her own route for UTA. I think I'll start riding the bus that comes 15 minutes later...
---
the mouths on the bus
tend to stay shut
in the universal language
of public transport
except for the woman
who’s cranky if she
doesn’t get at least seven hours
and prefers to have Thursdays
and Fridays off and knows that
new medicine saves more lives
than it kills even though when
someone goes is always up the
Man upstairs while she
cradles the American flag kitsch
with a shoulder strap on
her lap
carrying on her
conversation with the
driver from her seat
in the middle of the bus
how she hears his
responses over the
gasping moan of
the space heater
and engine
and air brakes
I’ll never know
but I could know
what she suffered
months years decades ago
that moves her mouth
in environs that keep
all others shut
and thus
discover discomfort
among my uncomfort
that is
if I’d stop moving my pen
and unshut my mouth
---
the mouths on the bus
tend to stay shut
in the universal language
of public transport
except for the woman
who’s cranky if she
doesn’t get at least seven hours
and prefers to have Thursdays
and Fridays off and knows that
new medicine saves more lives
than it kills even though when
someone goes is always up the
Man upstairs while she
cradles the American flag kitsch
with a shoulder strap on
her lap
carrying on her
conversation with the
driver from her seat
in the middle of the bus
how she hears his
responses over the
gasping moan of
the space heater
and engine
and air brakes
I’ll never know
but I could know
what she suffered
months years decades ago
that moves her mouth
in environs that keep
all others shut
and thus
discover discomfort
among my uncomfort
that is
if I’d stop moving my pen
and unshut my mouth
Winter's final laugh (or: Notes from a February 13)
Back in December
an acquaintance snapped back
How will the cold in February
make me any warmer now
and I laughed
at the weakness
that spawned that retort
born in the soft warmth
of southern latitudinal
komfortismus
for I relished the snow
while it kept the air clean
and basked in the novelty
of unmelting drifts
that is
until the drifts waxed old
and the ice on the drive never shrank
and the days dared you
to just try
to spend them outside
which of course hurt worse
than
well
they just hurt
but when the air seemed to breathe
the promise of spring
my wife and I traipsed
above the mountain resort
in snow shoes and short sleeves
until our thighs and necks burned
for who thinks of sunscreen in February
Oh winter’s died its death
I decided
and took a hammer
and spent an hour’s half
sledging the ice on my
north facing drive
but I must suppose it displeased
the gods of snow
to see me in a t-shirt
for this morning greeted me
with clear skies
tepid temperatures
and deceit
the northern horizon at noon
hinting a deeper grey
until a third the way through
the post meridiem
the cold fell from its height
pushing the fragile warmth
back to Arizona
while the flakes silently slid
roaring in their multitude
toward the diagonal earth
and if I believe the printed prophecies
which I almost always do
here witness we
winter’s final laugh
an acquaintance snapped back
How will the cold in February
make me any warmer now
and I laughed
at the weakness
that spawned that retort
born in the soft warmth
of southern latitudinal
komfortismus
for I relished the snow
while it kept the air clean
and basked in the novelty
of unmelting drifts
that is
until the drifts waxed old
and the ice on the drive never shrank
and the days dared you
to just try
to spend them outside
which of course hurt worse
than
well
they just hurt
but when the air seemed to breathe
the promise of spring
my wife and I traipsed
above the mountain resort
in snow shoes and short sleeves
until our thighs and necks burned
for who thinks of sunscreen in February
Oh winter’s died its death
I decided
and took a hammer
and spent an hour’s half
sledging the ice on my
north facing drive
but I must suppose it displeased
the gods of snow
to see me in a t-shirt
for this morning greeted me
with clear skies
tepid temperatures
and deceit
the northern horizon at noon
hinting a deeper grey
until a third the way through
the post meridiem
the cold fell from its height
pushing the fragile warmth
back to Arizona
while the flakes silently slid
roaring in their multitude
toward the diagonal earth
and if I believe the printed prophecies
which I almost always do
here witness we
winter’s final laugh
Monday, February 11, 2008
CD Compilation Liner Notes
I’ve compiled a themed album. This is primarily intended for my older brother (who is the king of CD compilations). He'll be getting his copy of the CDR soon. But I’m posting the liner notes here because this is something that has been taking up my free time (as if I had any to spare). If any of my friends would like a copy of this, let me know and I'll burn off a disc for you.
Album Title: “One More Time”
One of my favorite albums when I was ten or so was an audiocassette of about a dozen variations of the song “Louie, Louie.” I think it belonged to my older brother (whose taste in music I have always deferred to… until I fell in love with Pearl Jam). The variations ranged from the Kingsmen to Black Flag to high school marching band. I don’t know exactly why, but such a gimmick album (variations on a shallow song) has always appealed to me. Years later, when I heard a friend play a rocking acoustic cover of “…Baby, One More Time” in a Liverpool music club, I remember thinking something like, “I’m witnessing the redemption of Britney Spears.” Several months ago, I began collecting the different variations listed below. I consciously did not include variations that were close to versions below or really close to the Britney Spears version (like the one on Barbie and Friends or the one by The Starlite Singers) or dance remixes (although a dance remix in Russian or Mandarin WOULD be included below if I could find one). I still reel at times when I think on the diversity of countries and music genres represented. Versions or languages I would still love to find (they just gotta be out there – I know it): muzak, string quartet, Mandarin, Japanese, gangsta rap, Russian, and more. One version I would have liked to have included is the early cover by Ahmet and Dweezil Zappa. But I didn’t want to buy the CD and iTunes didn’t have it. Oh well. A compilation like this is nothing more nor less than a study of the border and bridges between the ridiculous and the sublime. Enjoy.
Song: “…Baby, One More Time”
Music and lyrics by Martin Karl “Max Martin” Sandberg.
Performed by:
1. Britney Spears. I like to think of this version as the “original cover” version. In the pop music industry, performers rarely write their own songs. This song is no exception. This song has never had an “original” version in the sense that the original was performed by the person who wrote it. Conversely, until Max Martin performs this song, all versions of it will be covers in the sense that nobody who performs it wrote it.
2. Travis. That’s the name of the band – not an individual. Scottish folk/rock group. Pretty straight forward. They were among the first to cover this song. Marty Casey does a version that is, in a lot of ways, indistinguishable from this version. So, of course, Marty’s is more famous…
3. Fire 99. Small time techno industrial band from Olympia, WA. They also have a song named after the old arcade game Sinistar.
4. Midi version. That’s not the name of a band or group. I actually don’t know who put this midi together. I like to think of this playing in the background of Metroid or The Legend of Zelda.
5. Joy Bellis. My older brother calls this kind of music JGB – Jazz Gone Bad. I think he’s referring more specifically to the kind of solo the piano does 2/3 the way through. But it does have a certain post-WWII-disillusioned-pre-rock-and-roll sort of charm…
6. Hog Hoggidy Hog. Get this: South African Punk/Ska. You can get all their music for free on some artist-supported music sites. Gotta love the muted trumpet solo near the end. Another notable punk performance of this song is the one performed by Nicotine on “Punk goes Pop” – but the Bowling for Soup version (see below) takes care of the American sellout variety of punk while this one by Hog Hoggidy Hog delivers a more in-your-face flavor of punk.
7. Crapman Sacramento. That’s his stage name, I shiz you not. His youtube profile says his real name is David Dufresne and that he’s from Canada. Beyond that I can only suppose he’s some flavor of Quebecois. You’ve already noticed this variation is in French (Frappe moi bebe encore plus). I can’t decide which version I hate worse: Crapman’s or Britney’s. How to even categorize this guy’s music – “consciously-horrible-Frenchy techno-junk”?
8. Fountains of Wayne. Pretty straightforward rock n roll. These guys got me started on collecting versions of this song. I heard them interviewed on NPR a few years ago and they played this version of this song. It reminded me of the version my friend played in that music club in Liverpool.
9. The Pigs. One of my favorite finds. These guys are Australian musicians based out of New South Wales. They play a raucous mix of country, bluegrass, and rockabilly. I like to think of the lead singer as a hillbilly from the film Deliverance singing this to Britney after she gets lost on a river-rafting trip.
10. Ten Masked Men. Like the Black Ingvars, these guys are another gimmick group – they do almost completely covers of songs from other genres. Unlike Black Ingvars, these guys are British (out of London and southwest England) and they play death metal. This is my favorite death metal version of this song. That’s right, at least one other death metal band has covered this song – Kevorkian – but honestly TMM’s version sounds creepier.
11. Bowling for Soup. Yet another example of punk sold out. This is from Disney’s “Freaky Friday” soundtrack. Catchy and safely edgy, this version exemplifies Disney’s recent ironic self-consciousness (i.e. embrace edginess because society at large embraces it – this is the same rationale behind selling t-shirts and coffee mugs proudly exclaiming “I’m Grumpy”). Nicotine also has a punk version on the multi-artist album Punk goes Pop (which after the late 80s is an ad absurdum).
12. This particular track has a spotty history on the internet. For a while, many sites that hosted it presented it as a cover performed by the doom metal band Type O Negative (one of those slow, heavy, mega-goth groups with an almost seven foot tall bass singer with fang implants who sings almost exclusively about blood… you know, one of those). But Type O Negative has denied doing this. Rightly so. This is the Britney Spears version slowed from a 3:32 song to a 5:00 song. But thinking about a chorus of bass-singing, fang-implanted, goth giants while listening to this makes it deliciously disturbing.
13. Trombo Combo. Smooth jazz. Actually quite fun. If this song had been written in the early to mid-70s, I’d like to think this is what the “original cover” would have sounded like.
14. Brad Roberts. You know… of Crash Test Dummies fame. This is from a live album probably intended as some sort of come back. But the acoustic guitars are a bit too clangy for my liking, and really this guy singing any song other than “Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm” just doesn’t cut it.
15. Black Ingvars. Swedish techno metal group. Self-styled humorists, they make a living out of covering songs from divergent genres (pop to children’s songs to Christmas ditties to gospel tunes).
16. Wise Guys. Geeky German A Cappella. It’s actually a pretty good translation (Schlag mich Baby noch einmal). Fast forward when the audience starts applauding at the end – it goes on for thirty seconds. I mean, they’re good, but not THAT good… Toxic Audio also does an A Cappella version (in English with male and female singers).
17. Chad Michael Murray. This is dialogue from the movie “Freaky Friday.” I couldn’t think of a perfecter end to this study of cultural vapidity.
Album Title: “One More Time”
One of my favorite albums when I was ten or so was an audiocassette of about a dozen variations of the song “Louie, Louie.” I think it belonged to my older brother (whose taste in music I have always deferred to… until I fell in love with Pearl Jam). The variations ranged from the Kingsmen to Black Flag to high school marching band. I don’t know exactly why, but such a gimmick album (variations on a shallow song) has always appealed to me. Years later, when I heard a friend play a rocking acoustic cover of “…Baby, One More Time” in a Liverpool music club, I remember thinking something like, “I’m witnessing the redemption of Britney Spears.” Several months ago, I began collecting the different variations listed below. I consciously did not include variations that were close to versions below or really close to the Britney Spears version (like the one on Barbie and Friends or the one by The Starlite Singers) or dance remixes (although a dance remix in Russian or Mandarin WOULD be included below if I could find one). I still reel at times when I think on the diversity of countries and music genres represented. Versions or languages I would still love to find (they just gotta be out there – I know it): muzak, string quartet, Mandarin, Japanese, gangsta rap, Russian, and more. One version I would have liked to have included is the early cover by Ahmet and Dweezil Zappa. But I didn’t want to buy the CD and iTunes didn’t have it. Oh well. A compilation like this is nothing more nor less than a study of the border and bridges between the ridiculous and the sublime. Enjoy.
Song: “…Baby, One More Time”
Music and lyrics by Martin Karl “Max Martin” Sandberg.
Performed by:
1. Britney Spears. I like to think of this version as the “original cover” version. In the pop music industry, performers rarely write their own songs. This song is no exception. This song has never had an “original” version in the sense that the original was performed by the person who wrote it. Conversely, until Max Martin performs this song, all versions of it will be covers in the sense that nobody who performs it wrote it.
2. Travis. That’s the name of the band – not an individual. Scottish folk/rock group. Pretty straight forward. They were among the first to cover this song. Marty Casey does a version that is, in a lot of ways, indistinguishable from this version. So, of course, Marty’s is more famous…
3. Fire 99. Small time techno industrial band from Olympia, WA. They also have a song named after the old arcade game Sinistar.
4. Midi version. That’s not the name of a band or group. I actually don’t know who put this midi together. I like to think of this playing in the background of Metroid or The Legend of Zelda.
5. Joy Bellis. My older brother calls this kind of music JGB – Jazz Gone Bad. I think he’s referring more specifically to the kind of solo the piano does 2/3 the way through. But it does have a certain post-WWII-disillusioned-pre-rock-and-roll sort of charm…
6. Hog Hoggidy Hog. Get this: South African Punk/Ska. You can get all their music for free on some artist-supported music sites. Gotta love the muted trumpet solo near the end. Another notable punk performance of this song is the one performed by Nicotine on “Punk goes Pop” – but the Bowling for Soup version (see below) takes care of the American sellout variety of punk while this one by Hog Hoggidy Hog delivers a more in-your-face flavor of punk.
7. Crapman Sacramento. That’s his stage name, I shiz you not. His youtube profile says his real name is David Dufresne and that he’s from Canada. Beyond that I can only suppose he’s some flavor of Quebecois. You’ve already noticed this variation is in French (Frappe moi bebe encore plus). I can’t decide which version I hate worse: Crapman’s or Britney’s. How to even categorize this guy’s music – “consciously-horrible-Frenchy techno-junk”?
8. Fountains of Wayne. Pretty straightforward rock n roll. These guys got me started on collecting versions of this song. I heard them interviewed on NPR a few years ago and they played this version of this song. It reminded me of the version my friend played in that music club in Liverpool.
9. The Pigs. One of my favorite finds. These guys are Australian musicians based out of New South Wales. They play a raucous mix of country, bluegrass, and rockabilly. I like to think of the lead singer as a hillbilly from the film Deliverance singing this to Britney after she gets lost on a river-rafting trip.
10. Ten Masked Men. Like the Black Ingvars, these guys are another gimmick group – they do almost completely covers of songs from other genres. Unlike Black Ingvars, these guys are British (out of London and southwest England) and they play death metal. This is my favorite death metal version of this song. That’s right, at least one other death metal band has covered this song – Kevorkian – but honestly TMM’s version sounds creepier.
11. Bowling for Soup. Yet another example of punk sold out. This is from Disney’s “Freaky Friday” soundtrack. Catchy and safely edgy, this version exemplifies Disney’s recent ironic self-consciousness (i.e. embrace edginess because society at large embraces it – this is the same rationale behind selling t-shirts and coffee mugs proudly exclaiming “I’m Grumpy”). Nicotine also has a punk version on the multi-artist album Punk goes Pop (which after the late 80s is an ad absurdum).
12. This particular track has a spotty history on the internet. For a while, many sites that hosted it presented it as a cover performed by the doom metal band Type O Negative (one of those slow, heavy, mega-goth groups with an almost seven foot tall bass singer with fang implants who sings almost exclusively about blood… you know, one of those). But Type O Negative has denied doing this. Rightly so. This is the Britney Spears version slowed from a 3:32 song to a 5:00 song. But thinking about a chorus of bass-singing, fang-implanted, goth giants while listening to this makes it deliciously disturbing.
13. Trombo Combo. Smooth jazz. Actually quite fun. If this song had been written in the early to mid-70s, I’d like to think this is what the “original cover” would have sounded like.
14. Brad Roberts. You know… of Crash Test Dummies fame. This is from a live album probably intended as some sort of come back. But the acoustic guitars are a bit too clangy for my liking, and really this guy singing any song other than “Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm” just doesn’t cut it.
15. Black Ingvars. Swedish techno metal group. Self-styled humorists, they make a living out of covering songs from divergent genres (pop to children’s songs to Christmas ditties to gospel tunes).
16. Wise Guys. Geeky German A Cappella. It’s actually a pretty good translation (Schlag mich Baby noch einmal). Fast forward when the audience starts applauding at the end – it goes on for thirty seconds. I mean, they’re good, but not THAT good… Toxic Audio also does an A Cappella version (in English with male and female singers).
17. Chad Michael Murray. This is dialogue from the movie “Freaky Friday.” I couldn’t think of a perfecter end to this study of cultural vapidity.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
On Solemn Mockeries
In analyzing (and condemning) the practice of baptizing infants, Mormon gives us a clear example of a kind of sacrilege he calls “solemn mockery.” The practice of baptizing infants is a mockery in that it turns baptism into a farce. He gives plenty of reasons: “little children are whole,” “they are not capable of committing sin,” repentance and baptism are only for those who are “accountable and capable of committing sin,” infants “cannot repent,” and as such, infants are already “alive in Christ.” (Go read Moroni 8 to get the context for all of these quotes). Ergo infants need neither repentance nor baptism.
But Mormon’s qualifier of “solemn” deserves consideration as well. By calling the practice a “solemn” mockery, Mormon recognizes that the people who practice it typically do not believe they are mocking God. In fact, people who practice infant baptism typically practice it with the utmost of respect and solemnity for God and religious ceremony. I’m positive that well-meaning anxiety and concern for the heavenly welfare of everyone prompted both the institution of infant baptism in Catholicism and Catholicism’s recent reassessment of the status of unbaptized children (http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2007-04-20-popelimbo_N.htm).
Now, I can think of a few “wise purposes” the Lord may have had in mind when He prompted Moroni to include Mormon’s treatise against baptizing infants in the Nephite record. Certainly, the most obvious one is as a preemptive argument for the more than one billion Catholics in the world today who (heaven forbid they actually) learn about the restored Church and why they need to be baptized as a post-age-eight person by someone with restored priesthood authority. Think how especially useful this is as the Church spreads through Central and South America (among the primary audience Mormon and Moroni intended the Book for).
Perhaps not as obvious, but certainly possible, is this purpose: Moroni gives us an EXAMPLE in infant baptism of a KIND of solemn mockery. If we apply Moroni chapter 8 ONLY in terms of infant baptism, perhaps we are missing additional applications to ourselves. I submit, therefore, that there are other solemn mockeries with which we should probably be concerned.
Again, a solemn mockery is an assertion that fill these two criteria: (1) it is a farce of an essential Gospel principle perpetuated by (2) people who are convinced it is God’s will based (most likely) on other less vital principles. Such mockery is mockery by virtue of a reordering of spiritual priorities.
Consider again infant baptism.
Assertion: infants need baptism
Justification: nobody can enter heaven without baptism
Principle it violates or ignores: no SIN can enter heaven (baptism merely makes sinless those who have sinned)
Why: infants CANNOT sin ergo they do not need remission of sin even through baptism
Reconciliation: people who die as infants go straight to heaven, for they are sinless
Consider these other solemn mockeries presented in the same manner
Assertion: We should avoid the things that LOOK like they’re evil
Justification: Paul and Nephi teach us to (respectively) abstain from or shake at the appearance of evil.
Essential principle it violates or ignores: “the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.” 1 Samuel 16:7
Why: based on a misinterpretation of Paul and Nephi
Reconciliation: see earlier essay on this blog “On Avoiding (the Appearance of) Evil”
Assertion: we must set numbered baptism goals (i.e. our ward will baptize twelve people this year)
Justification: goal-setting exercises faith. If prayerfully set, the goal (which may seem unattainable) will be accomplished with the Lord’s help
Essential principle it violates or ignores: agency of others
Why: “A missionary cannot baptize five persons this month without the agency and action of five other persons. A missionary can plan and work and do all within his or her power, but the desired result will depend upon the additional agency and action of others.” Dallin H. Oaks
Reconciliation: “Consequently a missionary’s goals ought to be based upon the missionary’s personal agency and action, not upon the agency or action of others.” Dallin H. Oaks (both Oaks quotes are from “Timing,” BYU devotional address, January 29, 2002)
Assertion: vulgarity (i.e. a word like the F-bomb) is the same as taking (or using) the Lord’s name in vain
Justification: Vulgarity is “profane” and using the name of the Lord in vain is “swearing” – “profane” and “swearing” are the same, ergo vulgarity and breaking the Third Commandment are the same.
Essential principle this violates or ignores: Taking (or using) the name of the Lord in vain actually means using an appellate of Deity in an authoritative manner when in fact such authority is absent, as in D&C 63:60-62, “Behold, I am Alpha and Omega, even Jesus Christ. Wherefore, let all men beware how they take my name in their lips—For behold, verily I say, that many there be who are under this condemnation, who use the name of the Lord, and use it in vain, having not authority.”
Why: Confusing profane and swearing is a basic error of confusing synecdoche for synonym. To “swear” (in a negative sense) used to mean to use the name of Deity in a purposely inappropriate manner – which actually is literally using the name of the Lord in a vain manner. “Profane” used to mean that which is unholy, unhallowed, desecrated, pagan, etc. The F-bomb (a VERY old word) was originally profane in the sense that its usage implied a desecration of a sacred act (i.e. procreation). Using the name of the Lord in vain was also profane, for it desecrated the sacred act of invoking God’s authority. The umbrella concept (at least the way culture uses it) is “profane”. “Using the name of the Lord in vain” is profane, but not all that is profane is “using the name of the Lord in vain.” Eventually, sometime several centuries ago, people began interchanging “swearing” for “profanity” which, as I mentioned, are scripturally synecdochic – not synonymic.
Reconciliation: Language is essentially communicative. Some words in certain cultures communicate hurtful or demeaning messages. Don’t hurt or demean (which means, by and large, don't use the F-bomb - but notice this is different justification than saying people should not be vulgar because it's the same as using the Lord's name in vain). The flip side of this is that it might be possible to profane in a genuinely beneficial way – like profaning that which is already profane, i.e. making or identifying as unsacred that which is already unsacred. I’ll write another complete essay just on this idea later, but the basic idea is an exploration of the question, “what is more profane – the F-bomb or the cultural conceit which keeps the procreative act shrouded in vulgarity?”
Perhaps I’ll also post more solemn mockeries later. These could include:
- denying the beggar to encourage self-reliance, when in fact everbody is a beggar and everything belongs to God (see Mosiah 4 and Hugh Nibley’s “Work We Must but the Lunch is Free”)
- seeking personal wealth to help the Church (think what Jesus could have done with a big house)
- preparing as a Church congregation for a natural disaster with more fervency than preparing to meet the Son of God
We could come up with more, but the point of all of this is this: learning about one solemn mockery in the scriptures (e.g. infant baptism) should alert us to other practices or mindsets we may have that disorder principles and make farces out of essential Gospel principles.
But Mormon’s qualifier of “solemn” deserves consideration as well. By calling the practice a “solemn” mockery, Mormon recognizes that the people who practice it typically do not believe they are mocking God. In fact, people who practice infant baptism typically practice it with the utmost of respect and solemnity for God and religious ceremony. I’m positive that well-meaning anxiety and concern for the heavenly welfare of everyone prompted both the institution of infant baptism in Catholicism and Catholicism’s recent reassessment of the status of unbaptized children (http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2007-04-20-popelimbo_N.htm).
Now, I can think of a few “wise purposes” the Lord may have had in mind when He prompted Moroni to include Mormon’s treatise against baptizing infants in the Nephite record. Certainly, the most obvious one is as a preemptive argument for the more than one billion Catholics in the world today who (heaven forbid they actually) learn about the restored Church and why they need to be baptized as a post-age-eight person by someone with restored priesthood authority. Think how especially useful this is as the Church spreads through Central and South America (among the primary audience Mormon and Moroni intended the Book for).
Perhaps not as obvious, but certainly possible, is this purpose: Moroni gives us an EXAMPLE in infant baptism of a KIND of solemn mockery. If we apply Moroni chapter 8 ONLY in terms of infant baptism, perhaps we are missing additional applications to ourselves. I submit, therefore, that there are other solemn mockeries with which we should probably be concerned.
Again, a solemn mockery is an assertion that fill these two criteria: (1) it is a farce of an essential Gospel principle perpetuated by (2) people who are convinced it is God’s will based (most likely) on other less vital principles. Such mockery is mockery by virtue of a reordering of spiritual priorities.
Consider again infant baptism.
Assertion: infants need baptism
Justification: nobody can enter heaven without baptism
Principle it violates or ignores: no SIN can enter heaven (baptism merely makes sinless those who have sinned)
Why: infants CANNOT sin ergo they do not need remission of sin even through baptism
Reconciliation: people who die as infants go straight to heaven, for they are sinless
Consider these other solemn mockeries presented in the same manner
Assertion: We should avoid the things that LOOK like they’re evil
Justification: Paul and Nephi teach us to (respectively) abstain from or shake at the appearance of evil.
Essential principle it violates or ignores: “the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.” 1 Samuel 16:7
Why: based on a misinterpretation of Paul and Nephi
Reconciliation: see earlier essay on this blog “On Avoiding (the Appearance of) Evil”
Assertion: we must set numbered baptism goals (i.e. our ward will baptize twelve people this year)
Justification: goal-setting exercises faith. If prayerfully set, the goal (which may seem unattainable) will be accomplished with the Lord’s help
Essential principle it violates or ignores: agency of others
Why: “A missionary cannot baptize five persons this month without the agency and action of five other persons. A missionary can plan and work and do all within his or her power, but the desired result will depend upon the additional agency and action of others.” Dallin H. Oaks
Reconciliation: “Consequently a missionary’s goals ought to be based upon the missionary’s personal agency and action, not upon the agency or action of others.” Dallin H. Oaks (both Oaks quotes are from “Timing,” BYU devotional address, January 29, 2002)
Assertion: vulgarity (i.e. a word like the F-bomb) is the same as taking (or using) the Lord’s name in vain
Justification: Vulgarity is “profane” and using the name of the Lord in vain is “swearing” – “profane” and “swearing” are the same, ergo vulgarity and breaking the Third Commandment are the same.
Essential principle this violates or ignores: Taking (or using) the name of the Lord in vain actually means using an appellate of Deity in an authoritative manner when in fact such authority is absent, as in D&C 63:60-62, “Behold, I am Alpha and Omega, even Jesus Christ. Wherefore, let all men beware how they take my name in their lips—For behold, verily I say, that many there be who are under this condemnation, who use the name of the Lord, and use it in vain, having not authority.”
Why: Confusing profane and swearing is a basic error of confusing synecdoche for synonym. To “swear” (in a negative sense) used to mean to use the name of Deity in a purposely inappropriate manner – which actually is literally using the name of the Lord in a vain manner. “Profane” used to mean that which is unholy, unhallowed, desecrated, pagan, etc. The F-bomb (a VERY old word) was originally profane in the sense that its usage implied a desecration of a sacred act (i.e. procreation). Using the name of the Lord in vain was also profane, for it desecrated the sacred act of invoking God’s authority. The umbrella concept (at least the way culture uses it) is “profane”. “Using the name of the Lord in vain” is profane, but not all that is profane is “using the name of the Lord in vain.” Eventually, sometime several centuries ago, people began interchanging “swearing” for “profanity” which, as I mentioned, are scripturally synecdochic – not synonymic.
Reconciliation: Language is essentially communicative. Some words in certain cultures communicate hurtful or demeaning messages. Don’t hurt or demean (which means, by and large, don't use the F-bomb - but notice this is different justification than saying people should not be vulgar because it's the same as using the Lord's name in vain). The flip side of this is that it might be possible to profane in a genuinely beneficial way – like profaning that which is already profane, i.e. making or identifying as unsacred that which is already unsacred. I’ll write another complete essay just on this idea later, but the basic idea is an exploration of the question, “what is more profane – the F-bomb or the cultural conceit which keeps the procreative act shrouded in vulgarity?”
Perhaps I’ll also post more solemn mockeries later. These could include:
- denying the beggar to encourage self-reliance, when in fact everbody is a beggar and everything belongs to God (see Mosiah 4 and Hugh Nibley’s “Work We Must but the Lunch is Free”)
- seeking personal wealth to help the Church (think what Jesus could have done with a big house)
- preparing as a Church congregation for a natural disaster with more fervency than preparing to meet the Son of God
We could come up with more, but the point of all of this is this: learning about one solemn mockery in the scriptures (e.g. infant baptism) should alert us to other practices or mindsets we may have that disorder principles and make farces out of essential Gospel principles.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)