After a haitus of a couple of weeks, the song of the week returns with "Kid on my Shoulder" by the White Rabbits.
I was introduced to the White Rabbits when they opened for Spoon when I saw them a month ago. They're a really interesting band with a unique sound. The band, for one, has two drummers/percussionists, two lead vocalists, and utilizes piano to the best effects of indie rock. Want proof? Watch the video underneath.
They're best at creating overarching hooks in their melodic themes. Did that last sentence mean anything to you? I hope it did despite the jargon I decided to use to describe it. Honestly though, the really unique thing about their sound is how they can create a melody out of a wall of instrument sounds. At first, many of their songs just sound like a lot of notes being bashed out. That sound slowly morphs into a really hooky melody that ensnares the listener- causing the latter to bob their heads incessantly. Their best songs are when there's a strong piano part to give them their unique brooding drive. This is all not mentioning the vocals and lyrics which are full of very melodramatic tones and themes that those teen kids will eat up like- like candy.
This particular song has all the above and provides the added bonus in that there are two general melodic themes that us listeners get to enjoy. The bridge and verses of these songs are two different melodies that each have their own unique appeal to a given listener. Just see (listen?) for yourself.
Addictions are horrible. Especially when you develop them when you need to be productive.
Through the course of finals this semester, I've become addicted to The Office. Now this is particularly bad because I haven't really been a regular viewer and I need to catch up to what's going on now. Have you tried to write a research paper, a final paper and study for a final while trying to get through three seasons of a particularly brilliant TV show? It's real hard.
To think I may be busting my balls right now, but in a week and a half, I'll be free of obligations- academic obligations at the very least.
I am slowly descending into insanity as I speak/type. I am descending into my mind's heart of darkness. Reread that last sentence. I'm going to be burnt out really soon.
Myanmar hasn't had a good calendar year. Between unrest though a struggle for democracy back in the fall and the death of at least 22,000 people due to a cyclone, it hasn't been a good calendar year.
A couple nights ago, while working on a paper, I'd periodically check in on the headlines on Yahoo! to kill some time. As hours past, I saw "Cyclone in Myanmar kills 200," become "Cyclone in Myanmar kills at least 1000" in a matter of an hour. I was watching as the news was slowly grasping at the reality of what had happened. Now, a day after the fact, the number climbed all the way up to 22,000.
Look back at the number I put up: 22,000. Do you understand the magnitude of that number? That's a lot of human lives. Let me put that in context. The September 11th attacks claimed 2,974 dead with another 24 missing. The worst American natural disaster in recent memory, Hurricane Katrina, claimed 1,836 lives with another 705 missing and hundreds of thousands displaced. The cyclone in Myanmar took more than 10 times the amount of lives Katrina did, and on top of that, up to 41,000 people are still missing and around a million people are homeless/displaced. Remember, this is in Myanmar not the United States- two and a half years isn't enough time in the United States to have "healed the wounds" of Katrina- how long will it take to recover in Myanmar?
This has to be one of the worst natural disasters in recorded human history (actually, it isn't- mental_floss made a list of the 10 worst). Is it me or do we see something like this happen every year or so? It feels to me people are less phased by this type of news- that is a very bad thing.
Breaking my hiatus for a brief moment, this was too good not to post.
Here we have two 4 year old democrats debating contemporary politics. Good stuff.
*** Final thought on this current upcoming election: First, let me preface this by saying that political elections in this country are never about the issues- it rarely is and the trend won't change because the issues are inherently "elitist"- they're difficult to understand by the common voter (being an "elitist" isn't a bad thing- it just means being smarter than the normal Joe). Elections are all about who seems like a leader the individual voter will like better. American electoral politics is personality-focused. I'm writing this while keeping so-called "elect-ability" in mind.
This long battle between Hillary Clinton and Barak "Barry" Obama is both good and bad. First it's good because it gives both candidates a reason to build up experience in all 50 states- they'll be familiar with the whole campaigning thing by the time one (maybe both) of them have to face McCain. Second, it's bad because the longer this continues, the more likely each side is alienating the supporters from the other. This is most problematic for the democrats if Barak Obama gets the nomination because more moderate voters tend to be Clinton supporters- they may find McCain more appealing than Obama.
Regarding the issues, I frankly don't care. I don't see enough of a difference between Obama and Clinton to form a solid opinion for one or the other. As far as personality goes, Hilary Clinton's appearance on the Bill O'Reily show confirmed what I thought: Hilary Clinton is a bitch who won't take shit from anyone- that's the kind of leader I want when they're dealing with, oh I don't know, say-Vladimir Putin.
Either way, this is what American democracy is- don't bitch about this, please. Personally I think a Clinton-Obama ticket is unbeatable and most desirable- it consolidates both groups of supporters under the Democratic Party's ticket, it also gives Obama 4 to 8 years to dispel any current "inexperience" claims against him and lets him get his feet wet on the national and international political scene.
I hope you all can see my latent dislike for the mindlessness of national elections in this country (actually, any country that holds elections). Issues are addressed in the legislative branch and the 3 years of "dead space" between presidential elections anyway- this is no time for issues. I guess with a society with a media that feasts on sensationalism it makes sense that elections are as ridiculous as they are anyway.
This turned into a rant- really quickly too.
Quick question: If you were Senators Obama or Clinton, would you accept a Vice Presidential position over your seat in congress, especially considering that within the 4/8 years of the election you would probably be the majority leader? Is VP still the political black hole it used to be? If Dick Cheney taught us anything, the answer is no, isn't it?
Oh well, so much for all that, back to my papers and finals!
