Tag Archives: media

Mental Help and NFTs

I’ve been on a bit of crisis in the past few days. Luckily, I managed to find a therapist that could help me work through the whole thing. I thought that mental health services wasn’t covered by the Korean national health insurance system, but luckily I found a couple of places that are willing to work with it. Many English-speaking clinics here are targeting private insurance companies so they could charge more, making it difficult people to find help.

저는 지난 며칠 동안 약간의 위기를 겪었어요. 운 좋게도 모든 일을 도움이 될 치료사를 찾았어요. 정신 건강 서비스는 한국 국민 건강 보험이 적용되지 않는다고 생각했는데다행스럽게도 함께 일할 수있는 곳을 몇 군데 찾았어요. 여기에 많은 영어를 사용하는 클리닉은 민간 보험 회사를 대상으로하여 더 많은 비용을 청구하여, 사람들이 도움을 찾기 어렵게 지였어요.

The last time I went to a therapist, a Korean doctor, she prescribed me with so much drugs that I wasn’t able to function normally. It was good to be able to freely vent out my issues, but my doctor didn’t really equip me with coping strategies to help me in the future, just drugs to numb me and help me sleep. As for moving on, I had to come up with my own strategies, which, looking back now, I’m not sure was really healthy.

제가 마지막으로 한국 의사 인 치료사에게 갔을 때 그녀는 제가 정상적으로 기능 할 수 없을 정도로 많은 약을 처방했어요. 내 문제를 자유롭게 풀어 낼 수있어서 좋았지 만, 의사는 미래에 나를 도울 수있는 대처 전략을 실제로 제공하지 않았고, 단지 나를 마비시키고 잠을 잘 수 있도록 도와주는 약물 만 사용했어요. 계속 진행하려면 나만의 전략을 세워야했는데, 지금 되돌아 보면 정말 건강하지 모르겠어요.

I’m hoping this time, it works out better for me. Some prescription drugs would probably help me, too. It’s been getting really, difficult to focus lately. I just need some help.

이번에는 더 잘 결과를 바랍이요. 일부 처방약도 나에게 도움이 될 것이요. 최근에 집중하기가 정말 어려워지고 있어요. 도움이 필요해요.

Let’s talk about NFT and art. Well, I’m not going to explain what it is. There’s already enough material out there explaining what NFTs are. What’s disconcerting to me is how much material CBC.ca has been pushing out about NFTs and painting them out as a democratizing force for artists. Did someone at the news organization buy a bunch of NFTs? Are there artists there selling their NFTs?

NFT와 예술에 대해 이야기합시다. 글쎄, 저는 그것이 무엇인지 설명하지 않을 것이요. Internet에서 NFT가 무엇인지 설명하는 자료가 이미 충분해요. 저를 당황하게하는 것은 CBC.ca가 NFT에 대해 얼마나 많은 자료를 밀어 내고 아티스트를위한 민주화의 힘으로 표현했는지요. 뉴스 기관의 누군가가 NFT를 많이 구입 했어요? NFT를 판매하는 아티스트가 있나요?

With COVID and the lack of opportunities to show works in galleries, I’ve been showing a lot of my works online and in magazines overseas. I’ve been participating in online shows and being more aggressive with my own SNS art account. This doesn’t necessarily pay off in more sales, but I imagine it’s what many people are resorting to now. But the danger of having work out there is that anyone can basically just take your work. I’m not heavy into selling prints, but really, if someone wants a print of someone’s work so bad, chances are, they can just take a high quality image and print it themselves. The control and ownership of an image is what makes NFTs attractive to me. I think if it’s cheaper and less environmentally taxing, artists should be marking their works and making it more difficult for people to steal them. Much like people who produce pornography, artists need to protect their work. Art and artists are devalued enough as it is, and works of art are easily moved, traded, and given away online. Something has to change that. Turning works into NFTs will hopefully give artists more knowledge of where their works are outside of Googling their own names or doing a reverse image search.

COVID 데문에 갤러리에서 예술품을 보여줄 기회가 부족해 온라인과 해외 잡지에 많은 예술품을 보여주고 있어요. 저는 온라인 쇼에 참여하고 있으며 제 SNS 아트 계정으로 더 공격적으로 활동하고 있어요. 이것이 반드시 더 많은 매출로 보상되는 것은 아니지만 많은 사람들이 지금 의지하고있는 것 같아요. 하지만 예술이 Internet에 있는 것의 위험은 누구나 기본적으로 당신의 예술을 맡을 수 있다는 거예요. 저는 인화 판매에 무겁지는 않지만 누군가의 예술을 인쇄하려는 사람은 예술의 이미지를 찍어 직접 인쇄 할 수 있어요. 이미지의 제어와 소유권이 NFT를 매력적으로 만드는 요소요. 저렴하고 환경에 부담이 적다면 예술가들이 자신의 예술품을 보여 주기 쉽고 사람들이 훔치는 것을 더 어렵게 만들어야한다고 생각헤요. 포르노를 제작하는 사람들과 마찬가지로 아티스트도 자신의 예술품을 보호해야해요. 예술과 예술가는 그 자체로 충분히 평가 절하되고 예술품은 온라인으로 쉽게 이동, 거래 및 제공되요. 무언가를 바꿔야해요. 예술품을 NFT로 바꾸면 아티스트가 자신의 이름을 검색하거나 역 이미지 검색을 수행 할 때 자신의 예술품이 어디에 있는지 더 많이 알 수 있기를 해요.

Getting into the NFT market however is another thing. Using blockchain technology and turning works into NFTs require gas fees. Last time I checked, gas fees are ridiculously high, and rates are getting worse as the hype over NFTs increases. Say minting an NFT costs $50. If an artist has a portfolio of 50 images, that’s $2500 he’s already lost on art that already exists with no guarantee on returns. And while people say that the world of NFTs is currently the wild west for artists, artists will still need to sell their works based on their names and reputations (not on the quality of their works. More on this.). Smaller and unknown artists will still compete with more well-known and established artists who already have a more comfortable foothold on the NFT market and can afford to turn more of their works into NFTs. It is not spreading democracy in the art world. It’s dividing artists even more and making it more difficult for newer artists to compete.

그러나 NFT 시장에 진입하는 것은 또 다른 일이요. 블록 체인 기술을 사용하고 작품을 NFT로 전환하려면 가스 요금이 필요해요. 지난번에 확인했을 때 가스 요금이 엄청나게 높고 NFT에 대한 과대 광고가 증가함에 따라 요금이 나 빠지고 있어요. NFT를 만드는 데 50 달러가 든다고 가정 해 보겠습면 아티스트가 50 개의 이미지 포트폴리오를 보유하고 있다면 이미 $ 2500이며 반품에 대한 보장없이 이미 존재하는 예술품에서 잃어버린 거예요. 그리고 사람들은 NFT의 세계가 현재 예술가들에게 황량한 서부라고 말하지만, 예술가들은 여전히 자신의 이름과 명성을 기준으로 자신의 작품을 판매해야합니다. 작고 알려지지 않은 예술가들은 NFT 시장에서 이미 더 편안한 발판을 가지고 있고 더 많은 작품을 NFT로 전환 할 여유가있는 더 유명하고 확립 된 예술가들과 경쟁 할 것입니다. 예술계에 민주주의를 전파하는 것이 아니요. 아티스트를 더 많이 나누고 새로운 아티스트가 경쟁하기 어렵게 만들어요.

And yeah, since we’re talking about blockchain technology, I shouldn’t forget to mention that it takes a huge toll on the environment to mint NFTs. Blockchain technology is resource-hungry. I can just imagine thousands of processors working overtime minting virtual objects that may or may not be assets in the long run. People have estimated that minting NFTs takes anywhere between weeks to years of an average person’s electricity consumption. No wonder it’s so expensive! Now multiply that to several NFTs.

그리고, 우리는 블록 체인 기술에 대해 이야기하고 있기 때문에 NFT를 발행하기 위해서는 환경에 막대한 피해를 입히는 것을 잊지 말아헤요. 블록 체인 기술은 자원이 돼지요. 장기적으로 자산이 될 수도 있고 아닐 수도있는 가상 객체를 채굴하면서 초과 근무하는 수천 명의 프로세서를 상상할 수 있어요. 사람들은 NFT를 채굴하는 데 평균적인 사람의 전기 소비에 몇 주에서 몇 년이 걸린다고 추정했어요. 그렇게 비싼 것도 당연헤요! 이제 그것을 여러 NFT에 곱하세요.

My biggest problem with NFTs is that it turns artists into gamblers and treats art not as art but as speculative commodities. Will my work make it big in the NFT market? Who knows? Let me invest some money into it and see. Well, that worked out. Now let’s turn more of my works into NFTs. With a considerable price to pay to get into the NFT market, artists would be more concerned about the attractiveness of their works as an investment, not as artworks. And I wouldn’t blame them. Celebrities could probably turn non-artworks into NFTs and compete quite well against true artists. As of this writing, Jack Dorsey turned his first tweet into an NFT and is selling it for $250,000. And as for valuing and appreciating art. Forget that. They’re all investments now.

NFT의 가장 큰 문제점은 예술가를 도박꾼으로 만들고 예술을 예술이 아니라 투기 적 상품으로 취급한다는 거예요. 내 예술품이 NFT 시장에서 크게 만들 수 있습니까? 누가 알아? 돈을 좀 투자 해 보겠어요. 글쎄요. 이제 더 많은 작업을 NFT로 전환 해 보겠습니다. NFT 시장에 진출하기 위해 상당한 대가를 치르면 예술가들은 예술품이 아닌 투자로서의 예술품품의 매력에 대해 더 걱정할 거예요. 그리고 저는 그들을 비난하지 않을 거예요. 유명인은 아마도 비 예술 예술품을 NFT로 바꾸고 진정한 예술가와 꽤 잘 경쟁 할 수 있어요. 이 글을 쓰는 시점에서 Jack Dorsey는 첫 번째 트윗을 NFT로 바꾸어 $ 250,000에 판매하고 있어요. 그리고 예술을 소중히 여기고 감상하는 것에 관해서. 잊어 버려. 지금은 모두 투자이예요.

“That’s a wonderful picture. It truly is amazing. I love how colors are so surreal without digital manipulation. Is it an NFT? Why not? You could probably see its price quadruple in the NFT market.” And then the conversation turns more into investments and speculation rather than art.

“멋진 사진 이네요. 정말 놀라요. 디지털 조작없이 색상이 얼마나 초현실적인지 정말 좋아요. NFT입니까? 왜 안돼? NFT 시장에서 가격이 4 배가되는 것을 볼 수있을 것이예요.” 그리고 대화는 예술보다는 투자와 투기로 변해요.

I read an account of one artists who said that with NFTs, he earns a 10% cut every time his work is re-sold. That’s great and all, but then again, did he make art or did he just make a commodity that’s traded? What was the point of the piece originally? Did Warhol ever demand or wish for a cut every time someone sells his work? If I sell my work, it’s gone. It’s not mine anymore. I have no connection with it other than it’s birth. To wish for a cut every time something is sold speaks of a weird greed which could be justified by some people, I’m sure, but not artistically.

NFT를 사용하면 예술품이 재판매 될 때마다 10 % 컷을 받는다는 한 아티스트의 이야기를 읽었어요. 훌륭해요. 하지만 다시 그는 예술품을 만들었나요 아니면 그냥 거래되는 상품을 만들었나요? 원래 작품의 요점은 무엇 이었습니까? 워홀은 누군가 자신의 작품을 판매 할 때마다 삭감을 요구하거나 바랬습니까? 내 예술품을 팔면 사라져요. 더 이상 내 것이 아니요. 저는 그것을 만들었는 것 외에는 아무 관련이 없어요. 그것은 어떤 사람이 정당화 할 수있고 무언가가 팔릴 때마다 컷을 원한다는 것은 확실하지만 예술적으로는 아니요.

Recently, investors burnt a Banksy and turned it into an NFT. These people are morons. First off, artwork doesn’t have to be turned into an NFT to have it exist forever. Diego Rivera’s Man at the Crossroads is still studied to this day no thanks to blockchain technology. Also, making or treating art as investments seems to really go against the spirit of what Banksy does. The man travels the globe and makes wonderful art for free. To willfully destroy artwork and turn it into a digital commodity is like ghoulish capitalists turning wonderful artwork into wasteful nerd coins. And no, it’s not elevating art into a different form. The burning of the piece is not art in itself. This is not conceptual art. This is dumb greed.

최근 투자자들은 Banksy의 예술픔을 태워 NFT로 전환했어요. 이 사람들은 바보요. 첫째, 예술 예술품이 영원히 존재하기 위해 NFT로 변환 될 필요는 없어요. Diego Rivera의 Man at the Crossroads는 블록 체인이 없지만 오늘날까지도 연구되고 있어요. 또한 예술을 투자로 만들거나 다루는 것은 Banksy가하는 일의 정신에 반하는 것처럼 보이요. 그는 전 세계를 여행하며 무료로 멋진 예술을 만들어요. 예술 작품을 고의로 파괴하고 디지털 상품으로 바꾸는 것은 멋진 예술 작품을 낭비적인 머저리 동전으로 바꾸는 끔찍한 자본가와 같아요. 그리고 예술을 다른 형태로 끌어 올리는 것이 아니요. 작품을 태우는 것은 그 자체로 예술이 아니요. 이것은 개념 예술이 아니요. 이건 멍청한 탐욕이요.

“Yeah, but Banksy shredded his own art in an auction before!” Yes, he destroyed it to make a statement. The people who burned the Banksy are hoping to start a trend and rake in profits. What’s their statement? “NFTs are now a thing. Come on and invest on NFTs!”

“그래, 하지만 Banksy는 전에 경매에서 자신의 예술을 찢어 버렸어!” 예, 그는 성명서를 만들기 위해 그것을 파괴했어요. Banksy의 예술품을 불태운 사람들은 트렌드를 시작하고 수익을 올리기를 희망하고 있습니다. 그들의 진술은 무엇입니까? “NFT는 좋아요. 어서 NFT에 투자하세요!”

Again, I’m not against certifying digital works and giving them secure signatures. It’ll be nice to have some sort of virtual permanence to digital works. But the way this whole thing is developing reeks of speculation and greed. And when someone says, “anything can be turned into an NFT,” then not only does it lower the bar for art (down to a celebrity’s hangnail), it makes art nothing more than gambler’s token. After all, “you can bet on anything at the stock market.”

다시 말하지만 저는 디지털 예술품을 인증하고 보안 서명을하는 것에 반대하지 아니요. 디지털 예술품에 대해 일종의 가상 영구성을 갖는 것이 좋을 거예요. 그러나 이 모든 것이 추측과 탐욕의 냄새를 풍기는 방식이요. 그리고 누군가 “무엇이든 NFT로 바뀔 수 있습니다”라고 말하면 예술의 기준을 낮출뿐만 아니라 (연예인의 자른 손톱을으로 레벨도) 예술은 도박꾼의 토큰에 지나지 아니요. 결국“주식 시장에서 무엇이든 베팅 할 수 있어요.”

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Netflix Moment

Rain

Here’s a moment. My wife and I were looking around Netflix, trying to decide what to watch over dinner. Koreans are well known for being very reticent and not being direct in their statements. They wouldn’t say “no” or deliver negative news directly, thinking it rude. Instead they would often do the courtesy of finding a workaround to finesse the situation. My wife no longer has patience with me. She is rather blunt in her statements, which can be a tad hurtful at times, but if you think about it, saves me a lot of time.

And honestly, when she says, “I’m not interested in that,” it is actually a microcosm of the many things that we are. Take Netflix for example. Most of the things I watch on that channel, she will never watch. She is not interested in my documentaries, crime series, or “not-so-popular” movies. Likewise, I’m not interested in her Korean reality shows and foreigners reacting to Korean food.

So when she curtly says, “I’m not interested,” to watching Issa Rae and Kumail Nanjiani’s film, ‘The Lovebirds,’ it really is fine. I’ll just have to turn off my brain and deal with Jennifer Aniston and Adam Sandler in ‘Murder Mystery’ instead. I wouldn’t want to be responsible for other people having a bad time due to my movie choice. Back in 98, I remember being harassed for an hour after watching ‘Rushmore’ with friends who didn’t quite appreciate the charm of Wes Anderson films.

Fast forward to this morning on the subway, already forgotten about Adam Sandler’s vacation disguised as a movie, I decided to check out ‘The Lovebirds’ on my phone. A few minutes in, the two main characters start having a couple’s argument/break up that is all too real. It’s like the writers poked a hole into my psyche and saw the sad husk of a relationship I’ve been living for the past couple of years and encapsulated it in an argument during a car ride.

I’m so glad my wife opted not to watch that film. It would’ve been super awkward watching a reflection of my current stagnant existence. Whew! Elephant in the room avoided! This way, I could continue being quietly depressed.

Ever have that happen to you?

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Achoo!

Tongue

Before the long Chinese New Year weekend, I asked a coworker if he was going somewhere. He said he had plans to visit Japan. He just hoped that he won’t be encountering too many Chinese tourists because of the coronavirus which is all over the news at the moment. I shrug and nod at the thought.

After living in Korea for so many years, I could differentiate Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese by the way they look, dress, and behave, especially as tourists. Listening to that comment, it’s a bit odd to hear such casual xenophobia from coworkers, when from a western point of view, he might as well be Chinese himself. Right now, I’m seeing Chinese Canadians are reporting being stigmatized due to fear of being infected by the virus. The same goes in other parts of the world. News about French newspapers being particularly insensitive towards their Chinese populace has been going viral, no pun intended. Asians aren’t usually very loud when they suffer racism. In fact, many racist Asian tropes have been so normalized due to people suffering in silence that it takes a fair amount of time to convince them that such tropes are racist.

In any case, I think situations like these are just catalysts for internal racist attitudes to be openly vented. I was inclined to believe that racism against Chinese people overseas due to the virus was just media hype, but then again, I’ve seen people in Korea actually fearing the Chinese. Chinese students and instructors who visited China during the break are asked not to attend school for at least two weeks. Places where Chinese tourists usually crowd in the city look quite empty. I haven’t really seen this strong a reaction in people and in the media since the avian flu hit the country, not with SARS or MERS. And even with the avian flu, the only time it affected me was not being able to visit the aviary in the zoo.

Anyway, I’m not really too concerned about it at the moment. I still believe that the rate of infection and casualty is still pretty low compared to other diseases that were previously hyped up. Though the youngest casualty is 36 years young, the majority of the casualties are over 60 years old. Videos of tents and Chinese medical professionals yelling instructions in Chinese might sound scary, but I don’t think it’s too much to get into a panic over. Tents with sick people, hazmat suits, loud foreign language… these are all intimidating at a very basic level. Then you add in some communism and a distrust of the Chinese government and you have a potent mixture of irrational fear that allows you to be dumb, or at its worst, be unkind to your neighbors.

Gotta keep calm.

Just stay healthy, eat right, wash your damned hands, and be nice to Asians.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Playing to an Audience

turtle

I haven’t seen Green Book yet. I work, I study, and I have Red Dead Redemption 2 on my PS4. Time is at a premium. Just yesterday, I finished watching the R. Kelly documentary series, a few days after everyone was talking about it. So yeah, I’m often late or find myself catching up on things. Anyway, I was ready to watch the Green Book sometime this upcoming weekend when I learned that the Green Book’s celebrated writer, Nick Vallelonga, supported Donald Trump’s infamous 9/11 lie that he remembers seeing Muslims celebrate on the rooftops of New York when they saw the Twin Towers in flames. This is a lie that he floated around to rally support from his racist base as well as to justify his Muslim Ban. Nick Vallelonga on Twitter supported Trump’s claims, saying that he too saw Muslims celebrating on New York rooftops.

After the Golden Globes and people discovering his questionable tweet, Nick Vallelonga has deleted his account. His PR representative, as of this moment, has said that since the account was deleted, there is not much to say about it. Why do people pretend that things on the Internet don’t stay on the Internet forever?

The film is about the unlikely friendship between a black jazz pianist, Don Shirley, and an Italian-American bouncer turned driver, Frank Vallelonga, Nick Vallelonga’s father. It’s the story of life during segregation and it has received acclaim, especially due to the performance of Mahershala Ali who portrayed Don Shirley. With Ali being a Muslim, I can only imagine how uncomfortable it must be for him to have worked on film with someone who is obviously prejudiced against Muslims. It’s already controversial with many of Shirley’s living relatives contested many details of the film, saying that the friendship between the two main characters is fictional and that scenes were created to play up black stereotypes. With the writer appearing to be a bigot, it would seem that the Shirley’s accusation that the makers of the film were more interested in making money than anything is growing to be more accurate.

This is not the first time I’ve seen someone change their politics or pander to the opposite site of the political spectrum in order to get a buck. Despite Nick Vallelonga presumably being a bigot or having some bigoted tendencies, that doesn’t stop him from seeing and crafting a good story that people would like to see. That doesn’t stop him from making art that people of opposite beliefs would appreciate. Knowing the background story however makes me not want to see the film, it is after all mostly a work of fiction. But it’s sad that all of this baggage is affecting performers who otherwise did well on the film.

Tomi Lahren, a conservative commentator pretending to speak for young people started out as a liberal. When that didn’t work for her, she became a conservative talked. With her bleach blonde looks and crazy talking points, conservatives were all too willing to give her the attention she wanted. Her African-American equivalent is Candace Owens. Same beginnings, started out as anti-Trump but is now a conservative talker. Follow the money. See what the audience likes, give it to them = profit. I think Louis CK is sorta trying to do the same thing, too. Before he was outed as a predator, his materials were raunchy and offensive, but tended to lean on the progressive side. But hearing his leaked materials, I see him courting the same men’s rights dude bros that he used to make fun of. He’s even making fun of students who were victims of school shootings despite having two kids of his own. It was the voice of a man aggrieved which is all too common with the alt-right types who claim that Gamergate was about games journalism. There is an audience for this, a very easy to entertain audience. Perhaps he’s just following the money. Maybe if he says “cuck” more often, I would be more convinced.

I don’t see how people do this though. I would never know how it feels because I never really earned a fortune through my art, but how does one make art or do work that is disingenuous to your true self? How does one spout of conservative nonsense when they are truly much smarter than that? How does Louis CK pander to a rather mean-spirited audience with his awful jokes? Or maybe that’s the real Louis CK all along. If so, how does one fake being a progressive when deep inside your soul is as black as Gavin Mcginnes’? How does one make a film shining the light on racial inequality and work with Muslim artists when deep down they would rather make a wall around the country to keep out all the dark minorities? Is it just the money? That must be an awful lot of money. That amount must be so big that you could hug it and at the same time feel its warmth surround you, giving you the most comfortable sleep at night. An amount of money that replicates the joy of making love, the comfort of being in a loving womb, and the taste of having sweet chocolate in your mouth (Am I describing cocaine?). What a wonderful amount that must be.

So yeah, maybe Nick Vallelonga is a bigot who doesn’t much care for the actual lives and values of the people who would most appreciate his story. I’m sure Green Book is a good movie, but other shows and movies have suddenly become more of a priority for me. I hear Bird Box is interesting.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Woven Tale Press

Vol.VI8cover-WEB

Thank you to the good people at The Woven Tale Press  for including me as one of their featured artists for their issue this month. They do wonderful work at introducing new artists as well as literary works to enthusiasts.

Woven_Tale_a.jpg

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

America is Bored

Drink

Many years ago, I enjoyed the first couple of season of The Apprentice. It was a rather goofy show. I saw it the same way I saw America’s Next Top Model. The Apprentice wasn’t producing any Warren Buffets out of its pool or talents, and America’s Next Top Model wasn’t going to produce the next Heidi Klum (who happens to have a reality show at the same time as well). I knew at the time that Donald Trump was full of it. He marketed everything and was willing to plaster his name on everything. His audiobook even had a section devoted entirely on advertising products. He was a cartoon of a man, and it was entertaining at the time. And then I got bored by third season.

I used to enjoy Gavin Mciness. I read Vice regularly on its early days and often enjoyed his many contributions although I didn’t really agree on some of his opinions. After splitting from Vice, I still enjoyed Gavin Mcinness with some of his comedic attempt. I thought the whole, “how to be a man” thing was great satire. And for a short period, I thought his hyper-masculine rants and conservative turn was a Kaufmanesque attempt at humor. It wasn’t. I moved on.

I saw a few of Jesse the Mind Ventura’s old show on conspiracy theories. I thought it was hilarious when it came out. I wasn’t quite sure whether it was tongue-in-cheek or not, especially when he goes around with his “investigative team.” A lot of what they talked about was hilariously flawed, but with a bit of production, it made it more entertaining than it should be. A couple of times, he even had Alex Jones on the show. I didn’t really know much about Alex Jones at the time, but I do remember that a lot of the big revelations and conspiracies he was talking about in the show all amounted to teases which led to nothing. There were no evidence. Just a couple of men often staring at a barbed wire fence and making up stories about what’s on the other side. I got bored and moved on to shows which had actual writers.

The first time I heard about Milo Yiannopoulous was when I heard about Gamergate. I wasn’t really that invested in the issue at the time, after all, there are bigger things out there in the world that should concern people than “ethics in video game journalism.” I found that Anita Sarkeesian and Milo Yiannopolous at the time were both working their own crowd to build up their brands. I was just amused that the whole thing blew up so much that Sarkeesian found an audience at the UN and Yiannopolous became a hero of the alt-right. And I’m like… how about playing video games instead of just arguing about them?

I used to watch Michael Lebron on Lionel Nation. He came into my radar around the same time I started listening to Sam Seder. I thought some of his arguments made sense, and it was interesting how he would sometimes go against popular takes on politics, culture, and what not. I thought he was a decent but an old-fashioned broadcaster. Then I moved on to other things. Next thing I know, I see him peddling Qanon conspiracy theories and posing with Donald Trump. Ugh.

What I’m getting at here is that America seems to have been caught up with me at my most bored a few years ago, me at my watching Jerry Springer because there is nothing else on television (and yes, I know Jerry Springer is a better statesman than most of the clowns out there right now). I’m surprised that these people I mentioned have large followings, enough for Mcinness to have global franchises of his hate group and for Trump to become the leader of the free world. Why didn’t the rest of the world move on? Couldn’t they see there are more entertaining stuff out there?

In any case, here’s hoping that the joy of seeing D-list entertainers will be usurped by an even darker desire… the desire to see someone spectacularly fail. It was entertaining to see the whole Gamergate thing erupt, but it’s even more entertaining watching Milo Yiannopolous fail again and again at trying to be relevant. It was entertaining to see Donald Trump rise. It’s the reason why cable news gave him and his supporters so much free coverage. But it would be even more entertaining to see a US president fail spectacularly. This would guarantee more rating for cable news shows.

I believe this is what ultimately will happen. People will root to see him fail just for the spectacle of it. How do I know this? The times I was watching The Apprentice, reading Gavin McInnes, or checking out Lionel Nation or Gamergate, I remember those are periods when I would occasionally scroll through Failblog. It was quite entertaining to see people fail. So yeah. C’mon America. Catch up with me at my most bored.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Suddenly Pink

Not tonight

God bless Pink! I’ve never been a big fan of her music, but it’s really good for her to speak out and be realistic about the challenges and problems with monogamy. There have been many articles and people talking about it before. Dan Savage, someone I’ve been listening to for years now, has said that the fantasy of monogamy which has been perpetuated by culture and media is basically just that, a fantasy. It is not a happily ever after. It is the beginning of a long and challenging path should you ever be foolish enough to commit to it. And that’s why I admire Pink for basically coming out and saying the same thing. It’s not so often that someone fairly attractive is out there with their sexuality basically come out and say, yes, despite how she looks, and despite how glamorous we imagine her life would be, she struggles living with monogamy sometimes, to the point that she’ll find herself sexless for a year.

Romance is not forever. A person’s spouse will eventually become their roommate, and they will no longer be amused with each other. Of course there will still be a bond there, but becoming romantic or being into someone will often become something they’ll need to work at. And so the best one can hope for is that their relationship turns into waves, where sometimes they’re into the other person, and sometimes they can’t stand them. It’s okay to not be into sex. It’s okay not to have sex. As important as it is, it is not the goal of most couples in the real world. Just getting along with each other is sometimes hard enough. And that hard, unsexy truth is quite difficult to admit for fear of being relegated into the Married with Children, Al Bundy archetype.

This reminds me of Bojack Horseman’s recent representation of asexual people. Sometimes people are really just not into sex. That doesn’t mean they’re devoid of feeling towards other people. They’re just not interested in being intimate with others in a physical manner. Nico at the Mary Sue does a better job of explaining it more than me, but being asexual, just like being monogamous and sexless, seem to be one of those things that people need to come out of in the midst of the culture of being into happily monogamous and enjoying sex. I mean, just look at most characters on television and movies. They’re all having sex. They’re either married, dating, single and having sex, or struggling to have sex. Same goes for most musicians, political figures, athletes, etc. I don’t even need to know about people’s sex lives and I get needlessly informed about it. Just recently, my wife and I were watching Justin Turner hit a homerun and win the game for the Dodgers. She suddenly goes and says, “you know his wife is a model, check out her Instagram.” Is that supposed to make me like him more? I already assumed most athletes are dating models. How is that little factoid supposed to help me enjoy the sport I’m currently struggling to keep interest in? We can’t seem to divorce ourselves from people’s sex lives so we feel pressure to be enjoying sex more.

So yeah, God bless the people talking about the myth of monogamy and the reality of wanting/having sex. It is quite refreshing to see some honest voices talk about these things in a world where sex and the pressure to have sex are ubiquitous.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Lending Credibility

Fake news

Back in February 2014, Bill Nye “the Science Guy” debated Ken Hamm, the creationist who built and operates the Creation Museum in Kentucky. Prior to the debate, people didn’t think it was wise for Bill Nye to be debating Ken Hamm. Though Nye wanted to have a debate from a more inquisitive perspective, to learn more about creationism and to see if it is an actual viable model for explaining the origin of things, people saw it as a way of elevating Ken Hamm, of inviting superstition to the scientific table, long after most of the world’s academic and critical thinkers have discarded religious dogma to explain natural phenomenon. I thought it was a useless exercise. Nye was lending his credibility to Ken Hamm and making him an “expert” equal to himself. I’m not opposed to debate, but I don’t see the value of debating people who sees a challenge to their ideas as fuel to their faith, scientific evidence as devilish trickery. The religious don’t even have conversations to be convinced. They are there to convince you, to add you to their flock. Scientists debate to see if there are holes to their ideas; see if their initial hypotheses holds up. So in the end, the debate didn’t do anything but raise Ken Hamm’s profile. It made him known to people outside of religious circles.

This is similar to my problem with Bill Maher. He claims that the best disinfectant is sunlight; and that we should confront irrational ideas and characters, and show them what fools they are. His show will have accomplished people like Senator Elizabeth Warren, Michael Eric Dyson, and Cornel West, then he will have people like SE Cupp, whose initial schtick “I’m an atheist but I envy the faith of the religious” is such a boldfaced sham that it’s a wonder why Maher didn’t run her out of the panel. Cupp was just a blip on the media radar at the time, but Maher elevated her, lent her his credibility as well as the credibility of his guests, and this resulted her getting employed by CNN and other media outlets. Maher claimed to do the same thing with Milo Yiannopoulos earlier in the year, to invite him to his show for a dialogue to see what makes him tick, then later took credit for Yiannopoulos getting exposed for his past comments regarding homosexuality and pedophilia. I saw the show and was not impressed with either of them. He didn’t really challenge Yiannopoulos too much on his flimsy arguments. I predict if Yiannopoulos wasn’t drummed out of the public eye by the Internet a week later, Maher would’ve had him as a regular guest, feeding off of his notoriety.

And now we see Kayleigh McEnany working for TrumpTV. A lawyer who graduated from Harvard, she worked at CNN as a Trump supporter, arguing for Trump’s and the administrations worst comments and actions. I wouldn’t mind her if her arguments were substantive, but the points she defended often goes against the viewers own senses (like Trump’s flip flops) and she sounded so disingenuous that it makes me wonder what it really takes to graduate with a law degree. She added nothing of value to debates, and it was infuriating to see CNN has people like her misinform their audience. A previously unknown person, CNN has elevated her and lent her their credibility simply by having her on their airwaves. The Most Trusted Name in News has misinformers on their payroll. And now McEnany is doing propaganda on TrumpTV. TrumpTV can now boast that it employs not just Trump relatives, but also former CNN contributors, giving merit and credibility to its “news.”

James Randi did it best. He had scammers on his show and showed them the flaws of their tricks. He exposed them in such a way that it wasn’t disrespectful. With logic and science, he showed how a person was deceiving the audience. Afterwards, he moved on to the next scammer. He didn’t have them as a regular guest nor consulted them regarding other matters. He didn’t lend them his credibility. Now, I’m not saying people like Bill Maher or networks like CNN should be debunkers. But they should call out lies and disinformation for what they are, and don’t reward liars by employing them or inviting them to sit on discussion panels to lie again.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Park Geun Hye Got Her

monster

The whole Korean impeachment thing has swallowed my wife whole. It’s everything she watches on TV outside of the occasional Korean drama. She follows it all the time on the Web and has even talked to me about the most unsteady conspiracy theories. There are even whispers about the President having AIDS, to which I say it should not be an issue because having AIDS does not affect one’s ability at their profession unless they are a sex worker. Concerns about this not only expose people’s ignorance but also their prejudice against people with the disease. It has made normally rational people irrational. Park Geun Hye has become the reason for all of the ills in the country. My wife even tried to drag me into an anti-government rally over the weekend. It consumed my weekend! And it will probably consume my wife for months to come long after the president is driven out of office.

The thing is, I used to be like her until I got tired of it. I still enjoy watching people yell at each other over politics. I still argue with people occasionally on Twitter about it. But I no longer see the point of the endless back and forth of talking points on the likes of Bill Maher’s show, MSNBC, and worst of all, CNN. You learn something about politics, but after a while, it’s just the same talking points against another talking point. It’s just the thrill of getting the last word in, saying it better than your political opponent. It gets very tiring. And as much as the Park Geun-Hye thing is a concern for my wife since she is Korean, following it religiously for every bit of development, even the scraps of conspiracy theories, does not make the process of impeaching her any faster. It doesn’t fix things that are broken. It just aggravates her to no end.

I remember writing a few months back that politics is my professional wrestling. It’s the endless drama I watch. I follow Canadian politics, but it’s not as absurd as American and now Korean politics. The thing is, just like professional wrestling back then, I try not to get too worked up when The Rock gets his title stolen by Triple H. I can simply walk away from it. Some people need to learn to walk away from politics now and then and not get worked into a frenzy. Listen to yourself before you start sounding like a talking point, or worse, a conspiracy theorist.

As corny as it may sound, instead of following things religiously, people should act. You want Park Geun Hye out? Then protest, support opposing parties, donate to groups, etc. Don’t just follow every bit of news, fake news, and non-news on the Internet as if that will help change anything. You don’t like Trump? Support the cause he’s bound to hurt. Same thing with Trudeau. Mostly a decent Prime Minister but his pipeline stance is not really to my liking. Support anything green.

I say these things now, but tonight, I’m meeting my wife and her friends for dinner. I’m sure politics will be talked about endlessly. And to preserve my sanity, I will reflexively reach out to my phone and look at my Twitter… where I will definitely find more politics.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Feeling the Menstrual Tension?

Bison

I miss Canada.

I’m not sure if it was Cesar A. Cruz or if it was Finley Dunne, but art should “comfort the disturbed and disturb the comforted.” I don’t 100% agree with the idea. After all, some art is just meant to be pretty. But yeah, some art is just so dumb that it hurts knowing that the government is paying for them. This is people’s money which could be better used for other public good instead of financing tripe.

Stop it Poppy Jackson, stop it (http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/26219/1/got-some-spare-menstrual-blood-this-artist-wants-it). I’m sure you can make artistic statements without rolling around in schlock. Apparently, she is asking for women to donate their menstrual blood for an upcoming performance piece. Now, this isn’t the first time she’s used menstruation in her performances, but I guess this time she’ll be needing more blood aside from her own. This is why people dismiss art and artists. It is Jackass stunts disguised as high art.

What irks me more is that the media just buys into the whole thing and doesn’t call it for what it is: a giant cry for media attention.

Looking at Jade Jackman’s article on Dazed, a lot of it is just artsy BS.

In recent weeks, there has been a growing feeling of tension – especially within creative and online communities – at the treatment of menstrual blood. But, Jackson does not feel under pressure by this to make something more ‘extreme’. Instead she feels that the similarities between topics signifies that a frustration is building in our culture and actually makes messages from all the artists a lot more powerful.

What growing tension? Does anyone feel this tension online or otherwise? This is why people are turned off. It doesn’t reflect what is going on in the real world. I consider myself quite the consumer of online information, and as far as I can tell, there is no “growing tension” regarding menstrual blood. It just naturally gets a negative reaction the same way any other bodily substance/wastes does.

These days we go to the Internet for a lot of things and it loses that one-to-one flavour that you would get with your doctor.” She adds, “The human contact of speaking is replaced by isolated online activity, so through use of the substance of people’s bodies I’m hoping to bring some of that closeness back.” On top of that, Jackson mentions how much more risky it is performing with other people’s blood as due to any potential of diseases she cannot “just throw it around as if it were her own.

Good luck trying to bring that “closeness” back. Most people would be finding out about her work online and that would be the end of it. The same activity she tries to fight is the same monster that feeds her. And yet Dazed doesn’t point this out.

If Poppy Jackson is gonna try to play around with other people’s menstrual blood, claim it’s high art and have media outlets encourage it, then what prevents Ryan Dunn from doing the same thing after he swam in people’s excrement? (http://jackass.wikia.com/wiki/Poo_Diving) Isn’t that almost the same thing? Isn’t he bringing closeness back by immersing himself into what could arguably be one of the most intimate aspects of a person? Isn’t there as much revulsion over feces as there is over menstrual blood? And as a bonus, fecal matter is universal, while menstrual blood is not. Mr. Dunn’s “piece” is more universal and far riskier than Poppy Jackson’s stunt.

And yet Arts Council England and the British Council have yet to reach out to Mr. Dunn.

This is why when someone hears performance art, they often assume someone will be prancing around naked doing something weird. People do schlock because they know the media will feed into it. It makes making “traditional” art a losing battle since most of the ears and eyeballs are trained onto either the naked lady or the excrement she’s playing with.

I fear that a hundred years from now, while generations of artists before produced Pietà, Burghers of Calais, Guernica, etc., art students will learn that the past few years have produced mostly stunt artists and sales people… people that played with excrement and sold it well.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,