Apparently there was some sort of sporting event yesterday. I don’t know what happened, but, as near as I can tell, Prince won. Generally speaking, I only follow professional hockey, and, as a Ranger’s fan, I usually only do that half-heartedly.
One thing I do try to stay on top of is nerd news. And here’s some of that. Briefly.
- RTVI: Rhyme Torrents vol. 6 had been (sort of) dated. The final date for submissions is currently touted as February 15th, with the release date still forthcoming. With all the new (and old) artists recently coming into the community, this one promises to be an interesting effort to say the least.
- Family Ties: Last week’s “What the fuck?” moment was handily won by DJ Snyder when he hipped the nerdcore community to the fact that high-octane noise rocker Andrew WK is, in fact, his cousin. Calls for a collaborative project between the two have been ardently requested ever since.
- Wookies are incorrigible bastards: Runner up in the “What the Fuck?” category goes to Chewbacca. What a dick.
- Joys of the season: The New Year always reminds me of the cyclical nature of life. Each and every year, I am struck by how recurring elements transpire in such perfect orchestration; the ebb and flow of the oddly ambivalent southern winter, the crumbling of well-minded resolution after well-minded resolution, Jesse Dangerously’s nominations for another score of regional awards for his superlative musical efforts. To read more about the latter and what you can do to help, hit up Jesse’s LJ.
- Somebody set us up the bomb: As a resident of the rural south, I would like to sincerely thank the city of
- Nekkid nerds: Loren, an associate of the esteemed Dan Lamoureux, just so happens to be working on a sexy site devoted to nerdy girls. This risqué undertaking is called DirtyNerdy, and its coordinator is currently looking for prospective models. Information concerning the project can be found at the Rhyme Torrents BBS.
- Whose space?: Dan has also lent his hand to the "get Nerdcore a genre on MySpace" campaign. He even put together a placard image for use in said crusade.
7 comments:
Perspective models? So like, really, really tall?
;)
Goddamnit! It should read “prospective models.” What’s up with me and the English language lately? We used to be so close. ;)
Overreaction in Boston, yes, but that doesn't make the campaign 'cool' or anything of the sort.
Streets belong to the city, hence the people, not the corporations. Cool or not those LED display had nothing to do under a public bridge or wherever else for that matter.
I don't think we'd see the same 'support' factor from the geek community for guerrilla marketing if no LED were involved and the advertiser had been Microsoft.
Here here Stephen, well said.
I am not proud of it, but I have been a member of several guerilla campaigns (Modest Mouse and Napoleon Dynamite to name a few). For these projects I was paid by large corporations to find new ways to brand the product, the one thing I would always refuse to do though was vandalism. Sure I might tell the companies I was doing it, if they asked me to, but I would fake results. Really I was trying to rip off the companies paying me, while preventing some other schmuck from vandalizing places for corporate money.
The thing to remember though, in terms of support, is these guys are not terrorists. They are vandals. There is a big legal difference between the two, and if the city of Boston tries to make a case out of these schmucks to cover up their inept handling of the situation, then the bloggers and online media (geeks mostly) should shine a light on that.
We can't let the government get away with abusing "terrorist" related laws on small time crooks and idiots.
I just wish those two assholes would stop referring to their advertising as art.
Eh. Not sure there is a difference. If a couple guys just decided that LED signs flipping off motorists would be funny, and the city reacted the same way, would you be so antagonistic? Why is it different, really, when they do it for promotional purposes?
Perhaps it would help if they included a warning label?
Honestly, I don’t think we’d see the same level of support for the cause if the campaign wasn’t linked to geek TV staple ATHF (and fervent mc chris supporter Adult Swim), but that’s just my opinion. And thanks for your comments, Stephan. I have now identified exactly one half of my European readership. ;)
I hear what you’re saying, Doc, though I reckon I’m a bit more ambivalent. While I appreciate the intrinsic artistic expression of graffiti, I also understand that it can be viewed as creating a public nuisance by damaging public (and sometimes private) property. Things get more problematic when you introduce a corporate element into the mix. The whole things puts me in mind of the recent PSP graffiti snafu that Sony found themselves in where both the general public and the underground community were disgusted by their antics. And how did they react? Alliwantforxmasisapsp.com!
I think, Church, that a lot of it comes down to accountability. If you and I decide to paper our respective towns with angry Mooninites, that’s a bit silly and risky for us but we have no one to blame but ourselves; if Turner asks us to as part of an ad campaign, they’re putting us at risk for their benefit. We’re just two ne’er-do-wells, but they are a respected (?) broadcast company. There’s also a certain element of exploitation inherent in the situation that, while I don’t agree 100%, I can really see how a lot of the people in our very independent, very DIY community are appalled by.
The situation is corporate shilling, for sure, and that the individuals responsible as well as their sponsors should probably be punished. That being said, I think Doc’s point about treating theses cats like vandals and not terrorists is probably the most important point. Boston botched their handling of the situation, and hiding behind our national miasma of institutionalized fear of attack won’t make that untrue.
Thanks to work being crazy, I haven't looked into this to much (though its been facinating to chew on this while reading Barbara Ehrenreich's book Dancing In The Streets. The parallels between the current situation and the historic repression of festivals [in the historical sense] are pretty interesting).
I'm curious though, how exactly has property been destroyed? Glancing at some picks, it looked like these things were hung in certain locations.
I ask because, if there wasn't any actual property damage, I think calling them vandals is going a bit far. May be litterers (or how ever you spell that).
Post a Comment