On The Road

Here's something you might not know about your beloved author: I don't eat meat and I never have. Just one of those things. And I know what you're thinking: "wtf Luke? that's crazy lol, why don't you eat meat?" Well I can't be bothered to tell you right now, that'll probably come later but the point is that if you're an idiot you might be the sort of idiot who asks this idiotic back-up question: "what if you were in, like, a plane crash, and you were trapped in, like, the mountains or somewhere, and there was only, like, steak to eat. Would you eat meat then?" Well my answer would be the same as always. "Don't be such a fucking idiot, of course I would." Just keep that in mind as you read on.

This is actually something I meant to write a pretty long time ago but I've only just got around to it now, so it might not be as accurate or as relevant as I would hope. Sorry about that everyone; I know you come here for the clarity of thought and the well-structured opinions that are usually on display, but just this once you're gonna have to put up with me rambling for a while with no apparent purpose or direction. Just this once alright?

Ok, what we're talking about just now is The Road. The Road is supposed to be one of the most important things in the past how many years and it's been called "gripping beyond belief," "a work of terrible beauty" and "shocking and harrowing but ultimately redemptive." Frankly I thought the work itself was pretty middle of the road (heh) but we'll maybe talk more about that later. First let's have a think about why The Road is terrifying but fundamentally flawed.

In case you don't know, there's a guy (the Man) and his son (the Boy) and they're amongst the few survivors of some terrible apocalyptic event and they're seeking redemption from near-certain death by walking a very long way for a long time along an awfully long road (the Road.) That's the plot in a nutshell, but the story behind the story lies in the Man and the Boy's relationship and their interactions with each other and the world. The Boy is depicted as innocent and well-meaning while the Man is a harsh realist who feels duty-bound protecting his kid. There's also a lot of Christian-style morality involved, and the man talks about God quite a lot, and that's pretty disappointing in something that had a lot of potential to be very anti-bullshit. Anyway the accepted line of thinking, as far as I can see, is that the terrifying thing about The Road is the fact that the Man and the Boy are the only good left in the world and they're forced to face off against horrifying horrors like cannibalism, baby slaughter, humanity reverting to survival-of-the-fittest primitivism, all that kind of thing. And the terrible beauty of the thing is the way they support each other and the fact that the Man is prepared to go to extraordinary lengths to protect his son and, by extension, innocence and the unsullied goodness that the Boy represents. Now this is a nice idea but it's pretty stupid, here's why:

It's true that the Man would probably go to insane lengths to protect his kid (I don't want to generalise here, but most parents would) but the problem is the ridiculously moralistic way he goes about it. Have you heard the expression there's no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole? Well it actually depends just how small your foxhole is, and I would imagine that when you find yourself in a really fucked situation, the exact opposite is true. The Man would be desperate to protect the Boy and for that reason I'm pretty he (or anybody else) would happily sack off his morals to do so. Remember the people they were keeping prisoner so they could cut bits off them and eat them? He would do that. And remember the spit-roasted baby? He'd probably do that too. (Get your mind out of the gutter, that's in the traditional sense. Although to spare his own kid's life who knows what a guy might be capable of?) Here's something: There's a thing in psychology that explains human behaviour; it's an upside-down triangle with your basest needs and desires at the bottom and as it broadens out it encapsulates all the shit that isn't really necessary but makes your life easier or more comfortable. And the thing is you have to satisfy the stuff at the bottom before you move on up. It's like having to force your way through the Green Hill Zone even though it's boring and easy and stupid before you can even start thinking about collecting all the Chaos Emeralds. So food comes right at the bottom, then shelter above it and so on like that. The point I'm trying to make here, the point I think got missed in The Road, is that morality is way at the top of that scale, probably somewhere between love and butt plugs. And that's why it's flawed, and it's also why it's terrifying: because after the apocalypse (which won't involve zombies by the way, so grow the fuck up) there almost certainly won't be any such thing as the Man, just a lot of people going around trying to eat bits off of each other and kill babies. So there you have it: why Luke McGinty is right about The Road, and almost every pointdexter in the world (who all seem to like it for some reason) is fucking wrong. Oh, and if you're too lazy or stupid to look into this yourself, they also made a film out of it.

Just one more thing: that was Sonic the fucking Hedgehog, man. I can't believe you didn't know that...

You Can Put All My Possessions In Jesus' Name -or- He'd Been To School But Never Finished -or- Everyone's A Critic And Most People Are DJs

Hi assholes. I know it's been a moment since I've written anything; we've been closed for refurbishment, didn't you notice? I was worried the standard blogger.com default settings were making me look like an amateur and I don't have to tell you that there is nothing amateur about this operation. Christ no.

Ok so what's been happening? Well I'll tell you: I'm thinking about converting to Catholicism. I mean, not really but it's a funny idea isn't it? Do you even call it conversion if you weren't anything before? I don't know. Anyway the thing is I've been listening to the Hold Steady quite a lot recently and that's sort of made me give the big C some thought (not that one. OR that one...) Did you know that one dumbshit critic once called Separation Sunday "the most egregiously American Catholic album since X's Under the Big Black Sun, Springsteen's Tunnel of Love, or that Jewish new waver Billy Joel's The Stranger." Yeah I know; egregious? What a dumbshit. But more about dumbshit critics later. Right now it's Catholicism. Actually religion in general but here's a quick thing first - did you notice that I wrote the Hold Steady earlier? Is "the" supposed to have a capital letter or what? The Hold Steady or the Hold Steady? If anyone cares at all, help a brother out. There's a comments section for a reason you know...

Alright, Catholics. Sorry if this seems like teaching your granny to suck eggs or whatever (odd expression, by the way...) but Catholics are fucking weird. So are Muslims. The whole thing about these people is that their belief, and their faith, is fucking unshakable man. Do you know anyone (weirdo Catholics and Muslims aside) that's like that? Someone with even one conviction that they have an absolute certainty about. Cos I certainly don't, and it's pretty fascinating to think about it. I suppose there's something to be said for that kind of unwavering dedication to your ideology, and there was a time when I would have had lots of respectful things to say about insane religious wingnuts. This actually reminds me of a time when I got myself into a bit of hot water in a politics class back at university (I know man, you wouldn't think it to read this goatshit, but yes I've been there...) when the tutor was talking about the idea of a post-9/11 world, Islamic fundamentalism the influence of terrorism on international relations and all that kind of thing and he asked the class what we thought about the whole scenario. And what I was thinking at the time was that the very existence of suicide attacks speaks of a culture of people about a hundred times more morally fortitudinous than any that I've ever encountered. Not that I would have, or ever have, advocated that sort of violence on the basis of religion, but at that time I might have argued that, although mass murder is a terrible frontier to take it to, belief on that scale is evidence of a strong system of values and a certainty of faith which is marginal at best in our society and which casts a harsh light on the shallow, instant-gratification culture that most of us subscribe to, whether you agree with those values or not. And even though Allah and his heaven are a huge pile of total bullshit, surely an unequivocal belief in him shows more strength of mind than a passing interest in Justin Bieber or whatever? Anyway that's what I was thinking at the time. And what I said was "I'm right behind al Qaeda to be honest..." Yeah you're right; good one Luke.*

Anyway that's enough of all that, because everything I thought about fundamentalism at that time is actually bullshit, here's why: the fact of the human animal having the capacity for abstract, cognitive thought makes the idea of fundamental belief completely redundant. Even worse, it makes it a hallmark of a terribly unsophisticated mind. I'm trying my best to think of a way to explain what I'm talking about here; let's think about designer t-shirts for a second. Have you ever considered how ridiculous it is to wear your t-shirt with some designer's name on it? You see, the trouble is that even though they're called "designer" clothes, the dude with his name on it didn't fucking design anything, the company just printed his name on your shirt, and to buy into the idea that having some douchebag's name on it makes your shirt any better than a plain white or something is tantamount to surpassing the logical, rational notion that your shirt's anything more than a sweat shield/boob suppressor which is in turn tantamount to saying "I have not the capacity for logical, rational thought." I think this allegory is getting out of hand. What I mean is that t-shirts are like religion because what's happening is you're putting unconditional faith in something that has no logical basis and simply can't be proven. And that, assholes, is the stupidest thing you can possibly do, here's why: because whatever you're beliefs are (unless we're talking about the gravitational constant being 9.81g or something) you are fucking wrong. This is simply because what you believe will make sense to you and you alone, and as hard as it may be to admit, if 5,999,999,999 people think you're opinion is bullshit, that pretty much means your opinion is bullshit. That (I think) is why you get so many dullards who are over-confidant and cocky and infuriating, because if you're that certain that you're right, you are certainly a dullard. It's also why Jeremy Clarkson is such an asshole, probably. "In the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt." Some asshole said that once, I can't remember who it was and he was probably a jackass of some variety but he just might have been onto something. There's also an argument against democracy in it's modern form in here somewhere but fuck man, even I'm bored and I'm not the one trying to force myself to read this dog dirt so I'll spare that for another time. Though I am cruel I am kind, or something like that...

But seriously, critics. I told you we were coming back to this didn't I? No such thing as an empty threat when Luke McGinty's involved. This was actually meant to be a complete digression but I've just realised it's pretty similar to what I've already written about. My quarrel with critics is that you're supposed to appreciate their opinions about music or books or whatever even though it's only one guy's opinion. Is it just me that thinks that's bullshit? Now I realise that some people are experts in certain fields and I'm not trying to say all critics are dumbshits and you shouldn't listen to them ever. I would, for example, trust the opinion of Roger Ebert over that of my friend Delaney who's really into Adam Sandler, but the point is that art is fundamentally a subjective thing man. How can even an expert write about art as if he's dealing in facts? Remember the "almost six billion" thing from earlier? Well yeah. Sorry Ebert, you're fucking wrong. And if you're the sort of person who bases your choices or your opinions on critical acclaim the lack thereof, then I think maybe it's time you go and buy yourself a new D&G t shirt or convert to Catholicism or something.







*I remember another story along the same lines, but funnier. There's this nightclub back in my old hometown, it's called Delaney's Dogshit Doghole or something like that and it's the sort of place that a scholar might refer to as "a fucking bearpit." Anyway a friend of mine, whose name happened to be Delaney, was in there one night and he'd got chatting to this girl. And Delaney, he's a pretty decent guy, not much of a hump-'em-and-dump-'em sort you know? And he's trying to explain to this girl that he's he's the kind of man that wants to connect with someone on an emotional level instead of just pulling some slut in the nightclub, and how he's pretty disillusioned with the fact that the whole clientele of Delaney's seem just to be out to fuck each other. Pretty noble sentiments, I'm sure you'll agree. Well what his booze-addled mind managed to say to the girl was this: "I just think every girl in Delaney's wants to have sex with me." Again, good one. Now I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure he went home solo that night...

Try The Fish

Tell you what, I had a lot I wanted to write about tonight. Serious intellectual discussion, philosophical debate, all that kind of thing. But I’m actually far too tired. Here’s a joke:

There were these two old boys, Hector and Willie, and I’m sorry to report their minds were both on the way out. Not what they used to be, you know? So one day Hector and Willie are sitting on the park bench when they hear the chime of an ice-cream van.* Hector says “I’ll tell you something, that’s really put me in the mind of an ice cream.” Willie agrees, “aye, I could handle an ice cream myself.” So Hector stands up, “alright, what are you having?” “I’ll just take a large cone,” says Willie, “but let me go with you.” Hector says “don’t be silly, sit there and I’ll be back with two large cones. No sense in both of us going.” Willie says “aye, but I know what you’re like Hector, you’ll forget something.” Hector says “What am I gonna forget? It’s two large cones…” and Willie says “nah, but I’m after a flake though.” “alright,” says Hector, “two large cones and a couple of flakes.” Willie’s still not convinced, “I’ll have to come with you Hector.” Hector says “you will not, I’ll remember.” Willie says “the thing is though, I want sprinkles. I don’t want to confuse you with sprinkles.” “Don’t talk pish,” Hector says, “I’m not about to get confused with sprinkles, now will you let me go?” Willie won’t let him go. “Hector you know very well you’re not up to this, something’s gonna get forgotten.” Hector says “it is not,; two large cones, flakes and sprinkles.” “And strawberry sauce,” says Willie. “Good grief, now he wants strawberry sauce as well?” “Aye I want strawberry sauce, that’s why I’ll have to come with you, cos you’ll forget.” Hector’s getting agitated; “listen, nothing’s getting forgotten alright? Two large cones, flakes, sprinkles, strawberry sauce; I’ve got it.” Willie fixes him with a hard look. “You’ve got it?” “Aye I’ve got it.” “You’re sure you’ve got it?” “Listen, I’ve fucking got it…” So Willie relents; “alright, away you go then…”

Willie sits there waiting. Minutes pass: five, ten. Hector’s not back yet. Willie’s checking his watch, wondering what’s taking his pal. Surely it doesn’t take this long to get a couple of ice creams? Eventually Hector returns and he hands Willie a package wrapped up in newspaper. Willie looks at it for a second a then he says “Hector, what the fuck’s this?” Hector says “what does it look like? It’s a single fish.” Willie’s aghast, he says “single fish? where’s my chips?”





*I had an uncle that went into business with an ice cream van once. It melted...

Thank you very much, I'm here all week...

I Got A Flow Make A B*tch Do A Cartwheel -or- Sound For Language -or- American Slang

Hey it’s good news everyone: I’ve been web-sensed. I don’t know if web-sense is a big thing or whatever, so here’s just a brief explanation: if you happen to work for the council or something like that and you’re reading this on your council-provided internet… well, the point is you won’t be reading this on your council-provided internet, because I swear too much and they won’t let you get on here any more. Either that or the photo I’m displaying was getting all the woman council employees too giddy and flustered and no work was getting done, but I’m pretty sure it’s all the swearing and wank-talk.

Now, you’ve heard the argument that swearing too much makes a person look like an idiot, shows your lack of a decent vocabulary or whatever. This is bullshit, here’s why: language exists the way it does for a reason, and to claim that there’s no need or excuse to use swear words betrays a very deep ignorance of the way it works. Did you ever see that experiment they did with the two pictures, and they told the participants that each picture had a name? They called one Kiki and the other one Bouba and asked people to say which one they thought was which, and something like 95% of people all said the same thing. Go and google it the images or something, see if you get it right. The point here (yes there’s a point) is that the way you speak isn’t just a random collection of sounds, words have a reason to sound the way they do and that’s why swearing exists. Remember ages ago when they did that stupid poll to find the nation’s favourite word? The winner was “serendipity.” Now here’s why that whole idea was bullshit: serendipity is a good word, but it’s only good for it’s purpose; the way it sounds sort of conveys, well not its meaning per sé, but the idea of it, you know? What I’m trying to say is that it’s a good word, but it’s not any better than fuck, for example, because they both exist to serve a certain purpose and they both succeed in doing so. Try it yourself, next time you step on a plug or whatever try yelling “serendipity” at the top of your voice, see how far you get. Ok, that’s all I’ve got about that.

Have you heard that Chiddy Bang track by the way? He’s got the trendy, by-assholes-for-assholes indie band sample, he’s got some very sketchy rhymes, he’s got the novelty gimmick video that he presumably initiated when the standard issue original failed to perform… in short, everything about it says “Luke, you hate this track.” But here’s the thing: I actually think it’s fucking great. Really. Ok, what else? Here’s the thing about sunglasses indoors/at night: this isn’t cool or lame in and of itself, how it works is that it’s about twice as cool or lame as the person doing it. Long story short - if you’re lame to begin with, don’t fucking do it. Also, I saw a guy in a G-Shock watch the other day. G-Shock watches - what happened there? And on a related note, does anyone know where Cilla Black is?

But seriously though, the new Gaslight Anthem record: on the first listen it sounds pretty good. Not the best they’ve ever done, but pretty solid y’know? Definitely worth a listen if you get a chance. It’s not “The Monitor” but it’s ok. And on that note, “The Monitor” by Titus Andronicus is fucking amazing. Listen to it immediately. Alright that’s enough, time for me to go to work and make dinner for assholes. Cheerio.

Hey Everyone! Come And See How Good I Look!

Ok, did anybody see the Leaders’ Debate the other night? I missed it myself but frankly I think there’s not nearly enough half-cocked bullshit political rambling on the internet right now, so it’s time for my two cents…

For all our non-UK readers out there (hi Paco!) the Leaders’ Debates are a stupid bullshit idea that someone decided to import from America to celebrate the General Election we’re about to have here in Britain and to give the leaders of our three main political parties an opportunity to go on TV and do their best John Kennedy impression while managing to look like a satisfied boy, a factory-rejected Ken doll and a lump of granite. And they’re bullshit for this reason: their whole point is to turn the election campaign into some sort of a bizarre popularity contest instead of an intelligent political debate. I don’t understand why so much stock suddenly has to be put into the leaders’ personalities, it’s seems like now we ought to care as much about their favourite colour as we do about their actual policies. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I was under the impression that a General Election is a thing designed to elect a new government, not the Nation’s New Best Pal. Here’s a good example: sidekicks. Have you noticed they all have sidekicks now? Gordon Brown and David Cameron have their wives and Nick Clegg has Vince Cable. Now the easy joke to make here, and it’s already been made ad nauseam, is to be like “what a gaffe by Clegg! Cameron and Brown have pretty wives for sidekicks and he has an old man! Lol!” but think for a moment… What’s happening is that Nick Clegg appears to be saying “vote for me, my right hand man is an astute political mind and arguably one of Britain’s most progressive economic thinkers,” whereas Brown and Cameron are both saying “no vote for me, I have married a stylish woman.” I don’t know about you, but I know which of those arguments makes more sense to me.

The trouble, though, is that they’ve got to have these debates and here’s why: because British politics, and it’s major players, in recent times they've started to look exactly the same; and the reason for this is pretty depressing. The way I see it, it’s as if our main parties don’t care about what they themselves believe anymore, they just want to convince the people that they’re out for their best interests, apparently attempting to follow a madcap “let’s please all of the people all of the time” sort of a policy, and that’s really not what it should be about. There’s been a lot of rhetoric about “broken politics” recently, well I figure if Labour and the Tories still had opposing ideologies then it might actually work, know what I mean? If politicians had any dignity or integrity they’d go ahead and say “forget about what the public want, here’s what I belive, take it or leave it.” That way maybe they’d get into power because they actually wanted to change something, as opposed to wanting to get into power for it’s own sake. By the way am I rambling at the moment? I suppose this is what happens when I try to be smart and don’t write about wanking. If this doesn’t make any sense feel free to stop reading at any time. Umm, back to the matter. Careerist politicians, to make an easy comparison with musical artists (do I do this too much?) are sort of like x-factor hopefuls or something. They’ll literally say or do anything if they think it’s gonna make them popular, which is pretty much the opposite of the integrity and honesty that some of the campaign’s popular soundbites have promised.

I could be wrong, but I think that brings us back to the beginning. I don’t want to vote for the guy that I‘d most like to have a beer with, or the guy that seems most convincing when he’s talking to a TV camera; the dude could have the charisma of JFK or be a one-eyed man o’ rock, if he’s got integrity then I’ll vote for him. So I suppose it’s just a shame Vince Cable isn’t handsome enough to be Prime Minister any more am I right? Ok, that’s enough of this.

Just Go Ahead And Think "Horsies"

I suppose rationality’s sort of a big thing just now. One of those buzzwords or whatever. It’s a pretty strange thing but even he smartest of people, even the staunchest defenders of a rational standpoint can get kind of ridiculous. So, I’ve been away for a little while recently; when I came back I found my bedroom not quite the way I left it. Just little things: some things had been moved and it looked like someone might have slept in my bed. Now it’s possible that while I was away some beautiful woman might have broken in, and while she was in there suddenly succumbed not only to nymphomania but also to agoraphobia and what d’you know? Looks like for the foreseeable future I’m stuck in my bedroom with a beautiful, sex-addicted woman who refuses to leave. Like I said, it’s a possibility but do you know what? It actually wasn’t the first thing that crossed my mind when I realised someone had slept in my room. Cos, y’know, be reasonable…
Now don’t get me wrong here, I know that irrational fears are pretty much an inherent part of the human condition. I’m well aware of that, ask me about snake-men some time. The thing is though, that you’re an idiot if you let your irrationalities take possession over the reasonable part of your mind. Let’s use terrorism as an example. (Yes I know it’s lazy and an easy analogy to make but what can I say? I’m stupid and lazy.) So we’re told that our country, our families and our pets or whatever are constantly at risk from terrorism and that as a result we have to let whatever failed nightclub doormen they have at airport security look at our dicks on the x-ray machine whenever they want to. Acceptance of the frankly ridiculous security rigmarole they have at the airport is a very clear example of irrational fears overtaking our reason. I say fear of terrorism is irrational because, by and large, terrorism doesn’t fucking happen. And don’t think it doesn’t happen on account of dick-viewing airport security men; terrorists can attack whatever the fuck they want. Have you ever been on a train? Or a bus? Or a busy street? All of these things would be pretty easy to blow up if you knew what you were doing, the fact that our cities, as a rule, don’t on the average day look like the set of Die Hard leads me to the fairly rational conclusion that terrorism isn’t really that big a threat. The message here, as I’ve said already, is simply this: be reasonable. Just because something's possible it doesn’t mean you have to assume that it’s actually going to fucking happen. And I understand the problem. I know that we don’t really have a sense of community the way I’m told we used to, that nobody speaks to each other any more and the result is a crippling emotional disconnect that’ll make you feel impotent and powerless and redundant at times, but personally I don’t think that’s an excuse to try to manufacture some sort of drama where there really isn’t any drama at all. So next time you come home to find your bed slept in, don’t go and assume that Zooey Deschanel’s car broke down outside and your flatmate invited her in to sleep in your bed and bone you. It was probably just that your friend came to stay or something. Ok, That’s all I’ve got to say about this.

I'm Too Cooooool For Music

Hello assholes and she-assholes. It’s been a while hasn’t it? I’m actually considering changing the title of this thing to “Luke McGinty Drinks and Doesn’t Write All That Much.” Not only is it true it’s also pretty snappy, am I right? If I could be bothered to go into the inner workings and change things around I might actually change it. Until then you’ll just have to imagine it. From now on imagine the title at the top saying Luke McGinty Drinks instead ok? Ok. Agreed. Hmm… I seem to be typing a lot and not thinking too much at the moment and that’s usually a bad sign so let’s try and be serious for a moment.
Alright, have you heard about this bullshit Owl City? I don’t know whether it’s a band or just one guy or what but it’s like the dude decided “ok I’m gonna make this band, it’ll be EXACTLY like The Postal Service but, I don’t know, it’ll be sort of like The Postal Service for cunts…” Well bad news jackass, they already made a Postal Service for cunts. It’s called The Postal Service. The real trouble, though, is that Owl City’s fucking fan base is mostly made up of so-called rock & roll guys. I don’t just want to pick on these assholes, but they’re symptomatic of a pretty horrifying state of affairs. Man, I don’t know exactly what’s going on with music just now, I really don’t. But I’m gonna write about it anyway. Welcome to the internet, assholes.

I think a big part of the problem is a sort of confusion that seems to exist between music people like and music that’s actually good. Have you ever heard the phrase “can’t you just enjoy something and not have to over think things all the time?” You probably have, and if you’re an idiot (you probably are) then you might even have used it. The answer is yes, but you have to understand that the fact you enjoy it doesn’t make it good. For example, I really like this band The Briggs. They have all these well-written, catchy songs, their aesthetic is pretty cool and their attitude is broadly in line with mine; long story short, I like The Briggs. Also, they’re fucking shit. They’re generic, by-the-book punk bullshit, they’ll never progress their genre and they’ll never do anything that hasn’t been done before. You’re probably thinking “Luke, wtf lol, why do you like them if you think they’re shit?” The answer is that it’s alright to enjoy something that’s shit, just don’t try to soothe your pride by trying to claim that it's something it’s not. I also enjoy You've Been Framed, wanking and McDonald’s but I don’t hold any of those things up as the pinnacle of human fucking achievement.
What this all leads to (I’m trying to stay on-topic tonight) is a culture that accepts, even encourages shit music because people are idiots and seem pretty unwilling to accept that they’re idiots who listen to dogshit. That’s pretty understandable, and I’m not saying you need to stop listening to it, just be realistic and give up on the idea that Paramore are the best fucking thing ever.

Here’s another thing: I can remember a time not too long ago when not everybody listened to music. Serious, it was like there was a minority of people who would put the effort in to find their niche and research the music they liked and everyone else was happy to just listen to the radio when they were in the car and buy the occasional Will Young CD. This was a time when music was still cool, and you could tell whether someone was cool by virtue of whether they liked cool music or not, and this was possible because it wasn’t like nowadays, when everyone listens to exactly the same dogshit. Some idiots have sometimes said “just because something’s not popular doesn’t mean it’s cool you know…” These are the kind of people who think that fish and chips is good for you and that liking The Replacements better than Paramore makes a person pretentious. In fact the converse is true: being unpopular doesn’t necessarily make something cool, but being popular sure as fuck makes it uncool. That’s why it was such a dick-punch when they turned hip-hop into an advert for trainers and rock & roll into Miley Cyrus and everything you used to think was cool suddenly wasn’t all that cool anymore.
Unfortunately that’s not even the whole story. If you don’t have any integrity then music is a pretty alright business to get into, and there are plenty of guys out there who will happily jump in front of any parade if they think it’ll make them some money, get their dick sucked or make their hair look better. Whether you’re into hardcore or rock & roll or hip-hop or whatever, you’ll inevitably have come across some disneyfied version of it produced not for love of the music but solely because someone figured they could capitalise on it. The logic continues like this: “if we can make a parody of one beloved culture for fourteen-year-old girls to listen to in their bedrooms, why can’t we do the same with all of them at the same time?" *thunder-clap, maniacal laughter* This is where we get the unfortunate practice of assholes watering everything down to make idiots like it, then trying to appeal to as many fucking demographics as happen to be fashionable at the time. And the result? The awful result is assholes like this motherfucker.

Oh, and Owl City.