Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Homage to Queen
I had to write a 3-4 page response paper for my History of Rock and Roll class, and I thought I may as well post it here since I suck at keeping up my blog. It was a very laid back assignment, so I took it pretty lightly.
In the sweltering summer of 1995, my parents loaded my brother, sister, and eight year old me into our tacky Dodge Caravan for a four-hour drive north from the suburbs of Miami to visit a certain Mr. Mouse in the Orlando area. I was desperately excited for the trip, and probably shot out more “When will we get there”s than my dad could handle. As we got onto the highway, he tossed me a yellow Sony Walkman portable cassette player to keep me quiet, and probably did not understand the ramifications of his simple actions: I had been serendipitously introduced to Queen, one of the greatest rock bands of all time. Before the trip was over, I had memorized the entire “Bohemian Rhapsody” (a feat I still brag about to this day), and had developed a profound liking for classic rock and roll.
For obvious reasons, the group that stuck out the most to me for the first part of our class was the band Queen. Although all of the other bands we covered were important and unique in their own ways, I feel that Queen is one of the most remarkably diverse bands in rock and roll history. Not only was their music creative and different from what most other bands were doing at their time, but their visual style and eclectic performances also gave them an edge that made them stand out.
When I first came across the band’s music at the age of eight, I was attracted to their catchy sound and irresistible beat. Upon a critical revisiting of their music well over a decade later, I am more appreciative of their obviously strong musicianship, and brilliant ability to compose such complex structures. It is also interesting to see how they maneuvered between many diverse musical styles, such as rockabilly, opera, heavy metal, and even disco. Not only were they wildly creative, but they were also very skillful in their technical execution. The harmonies in their songs display their incredible vocal talent along with individual mastery over their instruments. I was also struck by the wide range of lyrical themes, which includes songs about love (“You’re My Best Friend”), to more playful, melodramatic subjects such as bicycles (“Bicycle Race”).
In addition to writing great music and producing creative albums, they also performed exceptionally during concerts and even incorporated their audiences, creating a historically powerful dynamic in their live shows. Although I was not alive to watch any of their live performances with Freddie Mercury, technology has permitted me to get a glimpse of what their shows were like. (Thanks, You Tube.) I was able to watch a recording of the 1985 Live Aid performance in London’s Wembley Stadium, and was amazed at the enthusiasm and showmanship of Freddie Mercury. I was particularly impressed watching him lead the 72,000-member audience in an operatic singing game, and can understand how this performance was voted as “The Greatest Live Gig Ever”.
Although each member of the band played an important role in making Queen a part of rock history, I believe that they would not have been as successful as they were had it not been for Freddie Mercury. Not only did he contribute his famously powerful voice to the band, but he also composed many of their hits, such as “Bohemian Rhapsody”, “Don’t Stop Me Now”, and “We Are the Champions”, along with many others. His flamboyant persona also added greatly to the image of the band, and still serves as a big inspiration to many musicians in all genres of music.
Almost 20 years after the demise of Freddie Mercury and the original lineup of Queen, it is amazing to see that their music and influence is still present in my generation’s popular culture. Whether it be thousands of fans at a sporting event singing “We Are the Champions”, or a few over-beveraged youths singing “Bohemian Rhapsody” at a karaoke bar, musical traces of Queen can still be heard around the world today, and will always remain as an important part of rock and roll history.
In the sweltering summer of 1995, my parents loaded my brother, sister, and eight year old me into our tacky Dodge Caravan for a four-hour drive north from the suburbs of Miami to visit a certain Mr. Mouse in the Orlando area. I was desperately excited for the trip, and probably shot out more “When will we get there”s than my dad could handle. As we got onto the highway, he tossed me a yellow Sony Walkman portable cassette player to keep me quiet, and probably did not understand the ramifications of his simple actions: I had been serendipitously introduced to Queen, one of the greatest rock bands of all time. Before the trip was over, I had memorized the entire “Bohemian Rhapsody” (a feat I still brag about to this day), and had developed a profound liking for classic rock and roll.
For obvious reasons, the group that stuck out the most to me for the first part of our class was the band Queen. Although all of the other bands we covered were important and unique in their own ways, I feel that Queen is one of the most remarkably diverse bands in rock and roll history. Not only was their music creative and different from what most other bands were doing at their time, but their visual style and eclectic performances also gave them an edge that made them stand out.
When I first came across the band’s music at the age of eight, I was attracted to their catchy sound and irresistible beat. Upon a critical revisiting of their music well over a decade later, I am more appreciative of their obviously strong musicianship, and brilliant ability to compose such complex structures. It is also interesting to see how they maneuvered between many diverse musical styles, such as rockabilly, opera, heavy metal, and even disco. Not only were they wildly creative, but they were also very skillful in their technical execution. The harmonies in their songs display their incredible vocal talent along with individual mastery over their instruments. I was also struck by the wide range of lyrical themes, which includes songs about love (“You’re My Best Friend”), to more playful, melodramatic subjects such as bicycles (“Bicycle Race”).
In addition to writing great music and producing creative albums, they also performed exceptionally during concerts and even incorporated their audiences, creating a historically powerful dynamic in their live shows. Although I was not alive to watch any of their live performances with Freddie Mercury, technology has permitted me to get a glimpse of what their shows were like. (Thanks, You Tube.) I was able to watch a recording of the 1985 Live Aid performance in London’s Wembley Stadium, and was amazed at the enthusiasm and showmanship of Freddie Mercury. I was particularly impressed watching him lead the 72,000-member audience in an operatic singing game, and can understand how this performance was voted as “The Greatest Live Gig Ever”.
Although each member of the band played an important role in making Queen a part of rock history, I believe that they would not have been as successful as they were had it not been for Freddie Mercury. Not only did he contribute his famously powerful voice to the band, but he also composed many of their hits, such as “Bohemian Rhapsody”, “Don’t Stop Me Now”, and “We Are the Champions”, along with many others. His flamboyant persona also added greatly to the image of the band, and still serves as a big inspiration to many musicians in all genres of music.
Almost 20 years after the demise of Freddie Mercury and the original lineup of Queen, it is amazing to see that their music and influence is still present in my generation’s popular culture. Whether it be thousands of fans at a sporting event singing “We Are the Champions”, or a few over-beveraged youths singing “Bohemian Rhapsody” at a karaoke bar, musical traces of Queen can still be heard around the world today, and will always remain as an important part of rock and roll history.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Why I Am Not a Fan of Twilight
Before I begin railing against the series, I have to admit something: I was... really into it while I was reading. Yes, I will admit that Meyer's writing style is enticing, and she has a great ability to narrate, but it pretty much ends there.
There are, in my humble opinion, many problems with the Twilight series, including (but not limited to) shallow character development, unrealistic interactions and relationships, overused clichés and tropes, underlying misogynistic themes, and probably the worst ending of any series I have ever encountered.
The biggest thing that turned me off about this series was the ending. No, ALL the endings. I feel like I never got a proper ending from any of them. She shot 0 for 4. I kept thinking, "Ok, this one wasn't that great, but the last book will probably have something good"... I couldn't be more WRONG. She sets up an epic battle with the world’s most dangerous vampires and werewolves in a secluded forest clearing, and after about 40 pages of cheesy dialogue, the bad guys exit stage left, and they all repugnantly live happily ever after… in just 7 pages.
It was the equivalent of Harry Potter politely asking Voldemort to put down his wand, Frodo telling Sauron to stop looking at him and leave him alone, Luke Skywalker inviting Darth Vader to play hopscotch… and they do. It was the most anticlimactic ending for any story I have ever read. I sped through 4 books, adding up to 2,379 pages for NOTHING? What a climax killer! (There’s a crass metaphor I could insert here, but I’ll leave that up to you and your imagination to figure out.)
The vampires came from all around the world and had incredible super powers; I was so excited to see them put to use, but instead, they all walk away without lifting a finger. What a gyp! Even a battle where all the good guys survive is preferable to a nonexistent battle.
As for the character development, I understand that Bella was purposefully drafted to be a “hollow placeholder” so she can be a kind of “every[wo]man” for readers to project their own personalities onto, but that just further proves that Twilight is merely a pulp fiction series, and has minimal literary merit. People are fascinated with these books because they want to be Bella. They want to find their Edward Cullen. It just tickles people’s ears and throws in suspense to keep them reading, and this is precisely why I strongly disagree with those who say that Twilight is on par with Harry Potter. (For those who say it’s better, well, I think they are completely delusional and lack the ability to provide any intelligent literary judgment.)
J.K. Rowling wove together a brilliantly intricate plot with incredibly complex characters (eg. Severus Snape), created an entire wizarding culture down to the minutest detail, and implemented countless classical allusions to mythologies from all kinds of historical cultures. Also, she had the BALLS to kill some of her characters.
Stephenie Meyer’s story is filled with textbook clichés: new girl goes to school and feels like an outsider, but is so pretty that every girl wants to be her and every guy wants to be insi... Well, you get the point. As for Edward, he is the most gorgeous guy in the universe who hates everyone but falls in love with her instantly, and in spite of his douche-baggery, she falls in love with him too… Seriously? Not to mention the progress of their relationship is just as unrealistically perfect and cheesy, which gives young readers the WRONG impression of what true love really is.
Speaking of impression, the underlying message of this story is misogynistic and misleading. Once the two characters fall in love, nothing else matters. Bella forgets about school, forgoes all ambitions to do anything productive with her life, and becomes unhealthily obsessed and sickeningly reliant on Edward. She even becomes borderline suicidal when he leaves her, and latches onto another guy, falsely leading him on in the process.I could go on forever discussing how this story can be potentially damaging to the psyches of its young, impressionable readers, but my post is already long, and this video says it all much more eloquently than I ever can:
One other criticism I have about Meyer is her attempt to rewrite the story from Edward's perspective in her unfinished novel Midnight Sun. I read all of the script that is available, and although I think she drafts a more interesting Edward, I find it extremely inconsistent with the Edward in Twilight. In her first series, Edward is portrayed as a moral, chivalrous vampire who would never hurt a fly on his own accord. In Midnight Sun, he is selfish and violent, only holding back as to not upset Carlisle, the vampire leading his coven (or family)...
Unless... maybe Meyer was trying to show her readers how incredibly delusional Bella had become, and how enfatuation causes you to create false, unrealistic images of people in your mind? Hmm, now there's an idea!
Anyway, as much as I would love to continue ragging on Twilight, I’m not so sure that anyone has enough interest or a wide enough attention span to get this far into the entry. For those who HAVE gotten this far I extend a big thank you/congratulations. I hope this was somewhat enlightening and informational. I am open to and encourage dialogue and discussion about the book and/or my criticism. (I’m an English major, this is what I do)
There are, in my humble opinion, many problems with the Twilight series, including (but not limited to) shallow character development, unrealistic interactions and relationships, overused clichés and tropes, underlying misogynistic themes, and probably the worst ending of any series I have ever encountered.
The biggest thing that turned me off about this series was the ending. No, ALL the endings. I feel like I never got a proper ending from any of them. She shot 0 for 4. I kept thinking, "Ok, this one wasn't that great, but the last book will probably have something good"... I couldn't be more WRONG. She sets up an epic battle with the world’s most dangerous vampires and werewolves in a secluded forest clearing, and after about 40 pages of cheesy dialogue, the bad guys exit stage left, and they all repugnantly live happily ever after… in just 7 pages.
It was the equivalent of Harry Potter politely asking Voldemort to put down his wand, Frodo telling Sauron to stop looking at him and leave him alone, Luke Skywalker inviting Darth Vader to play hopscotch… and they do. It was the most anticlimactic ending for any story I have ever read. I sped through 4 books, adding up to 2,379 pages for NOTHING? What a climax killer! (There’s a crass metaphor I could insert here, but I’ll leave that up to you and your imagination to figure out.)
The vampires came from all around the world and had incredible super powers; I was so excited to see them put to use, but instead, they all walk away without lifting a finger. What a gyp! Even a battle where all the good guys survive is preferable to a nonexistent battle.
As for the character development, I understand that Bella was purposefully drafted to be a “hollow placeholder” so she can be a kind of “every[wo]man” for readers to project their own personalities onto, but that just further proves that Twilight is merely a pulp fiction series, and has minimal literary merit. People are fascinated with these books because they want to be Bella. They want to find their Edward Cullen. It just tickles people’s ears and throws in suspense to keep them reading, and this is precisely why I strongly disagree with those who say that Twilight is on par with Harry Potter. (For those who say it’s better, well, I think they are completely delusional and lack the ability to provide any intelligent literary judgment.)
J.K. Rowling wove together a brilliantly intricate plot with incredibly complex characters (eg. Severus Snape), created an entire wizarding culture down to the minutest detail, and implemented countless classical allusions to mythologies from all kinds of historical cultures. Also, she had the BALLS to kill some of her characters.
Stephenie Meyer’s story is filled with textbook clichés: new girl goes to school and feels like an outsider, but is so pretty that every girl wants to be her and every guy wants to be insi... Well, you get the point. As for Edward, he is the most gorgeous guy in the universe who hates everyone but falls in love with her instantly, and in spite of his douche-baggery, she falls in love with him too… Seriously? Not to mention the progress of their relationship is just as unrealistically perfect and cheesy, which gives young readers the WRONG impression of what true love really is.
Speaking of impression, the underlying message of this story is misogynistic and misleading. Once the two characters fall in love, nothing else matters. Bella forgets about school, forgoes all ambitions to do anything productive with her life, and becomes unhealthily obsessed and sickeningly reliant on Edward. She even becomes borderline suicidal when he leaves her, and latches onto another guy, falsely leading him on in the process.I could go on forever discussing how this story can be potentially damaging to the psyches of its young, impressionable readers, but my post is already long, and this video says it all much more eloquently than I ever can:
One other criticism I have about Meyer is her attempt to rewrite the story from Edward's perspective in her unfinished novel Midnight Sun. I read all of the script that is available, and although I think she drafts a more interesting Edward, I find it extremely inconsistent with the Edward in Twilight. In her first series, Edward is portrayed as a moral, chivalrous vampire who would never hurt a fly on his own accord. In Midnight Sun, he is selfish and violent, only holding back as to not upset Carlisle, the vampire leading his coven (or family)...
Unless... maybe Meyer was trying to show her readers how incredibly delusional Bella had become, and how enfatuation causes you to create false, unrealistic images of people in your mind? Hmm, now there's an idea!
Anyway, as much as I would love to continue ragging on Twilight, I’m not so sure that anyone has enough interest or a wide enough attention span to get this far into the entry. For those who HAVE gotten this far I extend a big thank you/congratulations. I hope this was somewhat enlightening and informational. I am open to and encourage dialogue and discussion about the book and/or my criticism. (I’m an English major, this is what I do)
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Alright, Alright, I'm Back
It's been a long while since I've posted anything, mainly because A. I have been ridiculously busy with school, work and life, and B. because nobody really reads this thing, anyway. But I'll (hopefully) be posting more frequently. Why? No reason in particular. Just a whim.
Anyway, I just finished reading O Pioneers! (1913) by Willa Cather for my American Literature 2 class, and I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed it (no spoilers, I promise). Her writing style is eloquent and clever, but never over the top and always entertaining. This is one of the very few assigned books that I ended up liking. No, loving.
She creates beautiful images that don't run on unnecessarily, and implements literary allusions for the educated mind to pick up on. (Had it not been for my professor, I never would have picked up on any of them.) Her characters are well-developed, yet still maintain an element of mystery that leaves you with questions to theorize on. Also, the plot was pretty amazing.
I'm also reading Thomas Mann's Nobel Prize-winning novel The Magic Mountain (1924). It's so bad, I think I'm going to leave that rant for a whole other post. I had to stop reading Rob Bell's Sex God because of school, and I'm starting Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises (1926) this weekend.
And I promise to write that Twilight bash post!
Monday, August 4, 2008
Retraction!
I take back all the good things I said about Twilight. Stephenie Meyer managed to completely ruin her "epic" story. A more detailed rant coming soon!
Friday, July 18, 2008
It certainly was a Dark Knight...
I went to the midnight showing of Dark Knight this morning and I was wowed beyond words. The story was unbelievably dark and seemed much more realistic than Batman Begins. The acting was all around incredible. ALL of the characters were 100% believable. Also, the action sequences were way more clear than they were in the first movie. They weren't all perfect, and at times slightly confusing, but they were still a huge improvement. I give it a 9.8 out of 10 because it wasn't perfect, but it blew my socks off. I think the last time I rated a movie this high was Return of the King.As most had anticipated, Heath Ledger gave the performance of his life. It is probably one of the best performances I have ever seen by anyone ever. He stole the show, is definitely taking the Oscar, and it's certainly not just because of his untimely death. I have not been scared of a villain like this since I was a little girl! I'm even surprised I didn't have nightmares.
Even with Heath aside, the acting was still fantastic. Christian Bale, Aaron Echkart, and Maggie Gyllenhaal (who was way better than Katie Holmes!) gave great performances as well. I also have to give some props to director Christopher Nolan who, in my opinion, has gotten so much better since Batman Begins.
Overall, I was more than impressed with the movie, and want to see it again soon.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Reviews on Recent Entertainment
I'm not in the mood to write full reviews of all the books I've been reading, movies I've been watching, and video games I've been playing, but I'll give a few words on each of them.
House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski: This book is absolute genius, and is the most insane book in existence. It perfectly represents Post Modernism in both form and content. The story is frightening and exciting, but I must warn that it contains some adult content. (I had no idea what I was getting into.) Certain parts were difficult to get through, but it was worth it in the end. I might write a better post on this later.
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams: Quite possibly the funniest fiction book I have ever read. I'm not a huge fan of science fiction, but I fell in love with this book after the very first page. It's humor is witty, ironic, dry, and often dark. For some reason I pictured the guys from Shawn of the Dead as the main characters. I'm currently reading the second book, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe, and it is just as good.
Lost Boy by Greg Laurie: After publishing 30 books, Laurie finally got around to writing an autobiography. It was a quick, easy read. Very encouraging to see that absolutely no one is beyond God's reach!
The Barbarian Way by Erwin Raphael McManus: I'm not gonna lie, I'm not even half way through and I hate it. It makes Christianity seem unintelligent and barbaric (hence the title). I feel as if he is saying there is no need to sit down and think your faith through. There are also some sketchy interpretations of scripture. I'll probably finish it since it's so short, but I don't think my opinion will change much.
The Happening by M. Night Shyamalan: I think the story's concept is very original: the only thing scarier than people killing people is people killing themselves. But I feel like something was missing. Some scenes were brilliant, such as the ladder scene (which was in my head for days), and the gun scene was pretty cool, too, but it just wasn't all that great for me. Not to mention, Mark Wahlberg's acting was surprisingly TERRIBLE. Overall, I give it a 6.5.
Kung Fu Panda: I took my little sister to see it with two of her friends and I absolutely loved it. Jack Black always makes for a good laugh, but I was mostly impressed with the animation. I did NOT expect such great quality! I think the best scene was where the villain (can't remember his name, I watched it two weeks ago) escapes from prison. The actions scenes were SO well done.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix video game on PS2: Lots of fun for HP fans. My only complaint is that there isn't enough dueling with death eaters. Voldemort was fun to beat, but I wish there was more fighting! Most of the game is spent running around Hogwarts, and briefly around Grimauld Place, completing tasks for Dumbledore's Army. One thing I really liked was that they unveil secret interviews with the actors and actresses from the movies when you score enough points. It was a nice break from reading. : )
Kingdom Hearts video game on PS2: I'm no where near being finished with this game, but I love it so far. It just gets frustrating sometimes when you're not sure what to do, but I suppose you can use Google for that. ; )
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
