Questions for everything; Answers to nothing:

The Piousness of conspiracy

 

For over a decade now, we have witnessed the proliferation of fringe conspiracy theories via social media. The once-derisive topic of conspiracy inspired images of tinfoil hats and weapon stockpilers regarded by the general public as little more than paranoid attention seekers whose ideas are fodder for Hollywood but of little substantive value. However, when public opinion polls show that 16-20% of Americans believe it is likely that federal officials assisted or intentionally took no action regarding the 9/11 attacks (some polls reflect up to 36%), we begin to flirt with mainstream acceptance.

Let us begin with a clarification: "Conspiracies" DO exist. In fact, the attacks of September 11, 2001 were a conspiracy: 19 Al Qaeda terrorists conspired to hijack 4 planes and attack US landmarks to protest our military presence in Saudi Arabia. "Conspiracy theory" is narrative that proposes a great social, political, or economic shift was orchestrated by interested parties.

Statistically speaking, conspiracy theorists have about as much success as prayer, which is to say, lower than chance alone. Apropos, considering that the belief in both religion and conspiracy theory require the same suspension of critical thought in favor of fantasy. For every Operation Paperclip, we have to endure Oklahoma City, Sandy Hook, Moon Landing, JFK, etc…

To those of you who favor conspiracy theory, this is my one empathetic gesture: I get it. My earliest predilection toward conspiracy was stirred by the Roswell crash of 1947. Forget spacecraft, alien bodies, and top secret, reverse-engineering projects conducted in hangers disguised as natural formations in the lakebed; It was the military--NOT conspiracists--who asserted that they had recovered a flying disc only to retract that statement later, right? Turns out, the term "flying disc" was part of a description of the mogul balloon's suspended "disc" section but the telex was unintelligible so the press release read, simply, "Flying disc crashed." Seriously, a clerical error seeded this one.

Reluctantly, like a Protestant child abandoning the comfortable suspension of their religion, I have accepted the "Project Mogul" explanation. Why? Because the existing evidence does not favor a crashed disc with any metallic properties nor do the often-contradictory eyewitness accounts hold up to scrutiny.

So, it is with great empathy, that I look upon my friends who are conspiracy-obsessed and recognize what a tremendous pain it would cause to let go of what has become dogma. That being said, I feel an obligation to challenge them.

Through the looking glass of social media, I have observed that evidence contrary to fantastic claims causes an adverse reaction among the pious. Rather than assimilation, the pious treat all criticism of their faith as evidence of repression. It would seem that belonging to a repressed minority, maligned and ridiculed provides purpose, righteousness even! Unfortunately, it does not provide truth.

The pious' belief persists because of a nasty little phenomenon we all must confront within ourselves: Confirmation bias -- our tendency to cling to that which supports our belief and disregard everything else.

In Michael J. Wood's paper, "Dead Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracies," Wood presents the idea that conspiracists have formed a monological belief system:

"A self-sustaining worldview comprised of a network of mutually supportive beliefs."

These networks may be familiar to those of you who favor conspiracy theory. You may be a part of a network that provides an illusory web of sources, confirming a proposed belief while never venturing outside of that support system for critique or perspective.

An example:

NaturalNews.com reported on the (non-existent) link between childhood vaccinations and neurological damage (1.14.2013). In an attempt to corroborate their claims, the author cited an article (not a study) by "consumer advocate" (not scientist) Tim Bolen. For those not familiar with his work, Bolen was the former publicist for Hulda Clark, a woman who claimed to have the cure for cancer (among other things). Curiously, ironically, Clark died of cancer. Clearly Bolen is not the most reputable or unbiased source for information.

Additional citations included links to the work of Mark Geier who, along with this son David Geier, have published highly criticized papers attempting to link thimerosal to autism. It should be noted that Mark Geier has lost his license to practice medicine for endangering children. Again, NN sought out highly questionable, openly-biased sources that fit their narrative and disregarded the serious professional and ethical conflicts of both Bolen and Geier.

Natural News made no effort to corroborate their claims with any peer-reviewed data, nor did they seek any information outside of the mutually supportive network.

Within these networks, contradictions abound. Wood's study at the University of Kent produced hierarchical regression models showing that people will believe contradictory things (e.g. Osama Bin Laden was already dead prior to the raid; Osama Bin Laden is still alive) so long as they can be positively associated with the view that authorities are engaged in a cover up.

This belief of an "invisible hand" is the unifying thread linking piousness in all forms; Whether your faith demands belief in an omnipotent being whose motives be concealed ("God has a plan" or "God works in mysterious ways") or that a small number of men control the lives, markets, and minds of free people, you will find blind devotion to the idea of both unquestioning faith and the "question everything" doctrine of conspiracy because, as Wood asserts, these beliefs are a part of a mutually supportive network.

Another bizarre similarity between the religious and conspiracist is an unwarranted disregard for science: Whether the religious disregard for the origins of life or the conspiracist disregard for modern medicine, eventually the question will arise, "Isn't science just another network of mutually supportive beliefs?" Perhaps... one MAJOR distinction is that science establishes an outcome with results that may be repeated reliably or, in layman's terms, it works. More so, science demands that sacred ideas be tested in order to progress. Challenge a conspiracy theory proponent to question his or her beliefs about 9/11 and you'll notice that with each answer, the goalpost is moved, where science must assimilate new data.

Here is a hypothetical conversation (although not too different from an actual conversation) which illustrates the conspiracists' penchant for "shifting goalposts."

Conspiracy Theorist - "If the WTC wasn't brought down by controlled demolition, explain building 7… It was not struck by a plane."
 Skeptic - "The 47 story building had damage to 20 floors from falling debris."
 CT - "Other buildings were hit with debris from the falling towers. Why didn't they collapse?"
 S - "WTC 7 had 47 floors of weight to support with several compromised support columns. The surrounding buildings were not only significantly smaller but had less fire damage."
 CT - "Why then did Silverstein say, 'Pull it' which is a demolition term?"
 S - "Silverstein is not a demolition expert and he was speaking to the Fire Dept. Captain (also not a demolition expert) suggesting that they should pull the rescue teams out."
 CT - "But Alex Jones posted a video where a foreman uses the term 'pull' -- meaning controlled demolition."
 S - "Yes, and the video is edited conveniently before the demo team pulls the building down with hydraulic cables NOT explosives."
 CT - "I've seen controlled demolition buildings and the floors pancake just like in WTC 7."
 S - "No explosives were used in WTC 7. No eyewitnesses claim to have seen an explosion. More so, there is clear video of the penthouse collapsing first, due to fire, NOT an explosion."
 CT - "Still, why would 'pull IT' refer to rescue efforts and not the building?"

From there, the argument devolves into a debate about semantics and occam’s razor be damned! With this basic example you'll notice a pattern: With each explanation, so long as another question may be posed, the previous answer is considered invalid by the conspiracy theorist rather than assimilated.

Failing reason, I've observed that the pious resort to ad hominem: "Sheep" or "sheeple" seem to be the go-to standard (and favorite of David Icke) coupled with the assumption that to question their worldview is tantamount to believing everything without question -- I was recently accused of believing "everything the government tells me," a straw-man tactic. This, of course, is subterfuge, designed to shift the scrutiny away from their crumbling logic, mischaracterize the argument against, and focus instead on aligning their detractors with whom they perceive to be the enemy -- a consumer of mass media or mass disinformation.

Sheep or no, conspiracy peddlers are the boy who cried wolf.

Silly that we should be so preoccupied with each other when the concerns that we all hold close to heart is that each tragedy might bring about another short-sighted piece of legislation that could erode our constitutional rights.

Where a reasonable person would see these legislative actions as mere incompetence on the part of lawmakers overreacting to placate their worried constituents, the pious see it as a clear sign that this was the intention all along: Whether JFK's assassination was orchestrated to eliminate his opposition to the Vietnam war or 9/11 to justify an invasion of Iraq (among other claims), what we have is opportunism in the wake of tragedy. Nothing more.

Fear may be a mechanism of media to hold an audience but these tactics are employed with far greater rhetoric by the pimps of fear. Conspiracy peddlers like Alex Jones and David Icke may disagree about whether the 6 Satan-worshipping bankers who control the world are lizards or just regular (Jewish) men (and don’t dare call them racist for their Zionist preoccupation) but they both have a product to sell and they both routinely prostitute fear on par with the tyrants to which they so routinely compare our political leaders.

Did web traffic to INFOWARS.com spike in the wake of the Boston marathon bombing? If so, does that make Alex Jones complicit in this crime? No. It makes him an opportunist. Fear is business. A frightened individual might listen to Alex Jones. A secure individual might listen to a TED talk. Though I must say, it is poetic that there exist conspiracies about Alex Jones being an agent of disinformation. You get what you give, Mr. Jones.

Since I began this dissection of conspiracy theory proponents, it's been reported that Boston bombing suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was a fan of Alex Jones' InfoWars site. It should come as no surprise that Tsarnaev was NOT the first InfoWarrior to commit murder over fears stoked by Jones. Richard Poplawski murdered 3 police officers in a shootout because he believed in a Zionist conspiracy controlling the media, markets, and government who would take away his freedom of speech and guns. Poplawski was also a white supremacist and a member of the white supremacist website Stormfront. Certainly, Jones is not responsible for the actions of these men, but his blatant fear-mongering contributed in part to fracturing the already-compromised psyche of these anarchists.

The hyperbole being championed by the pious, "question everything" crowd have all become victims of the ultimate irony: Agents of disinformation whose obfuscation of real issues helps the very government they loathe to continue to pass short-sighted laws like the Patriot Act. When your biggest challengers all appear to be wearing funny hats and claiming that you control the weather with the same zeal with which they condemn SOPA, the message has become diluted.

"Question everything" should NOT be the mantra of the enlightened. Certainly an individual may choose to question physics on a daily basis by testing whether or not their dinner plate will float when released in mid-air but that person will likely starve.

For those who favor conspiracy, perhaps you view our polarized society as simply a mindless horde of consumers, blindly tuning into the network news channel whose political bias most resembles their own. Understand that the alternative you've chosen is no different. You've selected a fringe pipeline of information whose bias most resembles your own but you've done so with an imbued sense of self-righteousness.

No matter your predisposition, we owe it to ourselves to be informed. More so, we must be aware of the cheap, editorial tactics used to stir emotional response. We must demand rationality. We must encourage reasoned inquiry so long as a willingness to listen to answers exists. We also demand of the pious, that which Carl Sagan so famously demanded, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The "Sagan Standard." Sagan borrowed this from skeptic Marcello Truzzi and, in this demon-haunted world, we so desperately need more people who have their own standards for acceptance and reasonable inquiry.

I anticipate the, "Oh really, why don't you tell us all how to think?! You fascist!" If that's all to be gleaned from this observation, so be it.

Where is the harm, you might ask? First, as an individual you should be concerned that you are being misled by your alternative media with the same ire you reserve for the major news networks. Second, you've been sold a bill of goods: Ideas about liberty, freedom, patriotism, and the American dream. In reality, you've been indoctrinated by right-wing paranoia and anarchism disguised as libertarianism. Third, the unstable among you -- the Tamerian Tsarnaev's or Richard Poplawski's -- are being conditioned to lash out at invisible monsters in appalling ways.

I present my observation comfortable in the knowledge that my margin for error could be greater than I know. Can you do the same?

Samuel Farmer
MOVEMENT MAGAZINE Op-Ed contributor 

Television the Vast Wasteland

By Gary Roen

     Television has been called a vast wasteland but now more than ever it is proven over and over again why it’s true.

     A while ago I used to watch network TV.   Today I view a small amount of shows that are from the networks.  Also I tune into cable stations for little amounts of programming.  I do watch news channels like CNN, Fox, or MSNBC but even there, I am tuning in less than I used to.  There are many reasons.

    Deregulation of the industry is one of the reasons but it is not the major one.  Still it is high on the list because what was controlled was changed in the 1980’s.  A certain number of commercials were regulated in any one segment of a show.  When the restrictions were taken off, the advertisers could run lots more ads in any portion of a show.  I’ve noticed that so many of the commercials are hard to follow, sing too much, are too loud and are just plain offensive.  There are too many useless ones and they take away from the enjoyment of a show.  Even with DVR it is not enough because there are too many ads to rip through and sometimes you go too far into an episode and have to backtrack.

     I used to follow a show every week and make time to watch.  A new mindset came in with corporate executives who are constantly changing the day and time one is on, they take it off for a while then bring it back later in the year or they have one proceeding nicely that is gaining ratings until they put a couple of re-runs on and they replay the same one two to three times in one week.  I, the viewer, tune in and find episodes I’ve seen before and decide to observe something else, then stop watching the original show all together.  So the head honchos in their wisdom conclude no one is viewing  their shows.   This was the case with “Detroit 187,” “Brothers and Sisters,”  “Blue Bloods,” and the new “Hawaii Five O.”   The last two are coming back next season but one thing is clear I will not tune in for any of them.  I’m done trying to find them.

     Another aspect is that programming is beamed to people who are 14 to 29 years old.  Just like the movies in the theatres.  One of the best shows to make a statement throughout its run was “Boston Legal.”  In so many episodes it made fun of the logic of the major networks’ programming.  A show like “Harry’s Law,” is questionable whether it will be back next year.  It has a growing audience but not the age NBC wants.  I have to laugh with the show “Jag” that premiered on NBC but was canceled after one season.  CBS picked it up to run for another 9 seasons.  Sometimes shows do make it but most of the time they don’t.

     That is only part of the equation.  The other thing that drives me up the wall is that you have a show and are really into it until there are logos or crawlers for other shows that fade in and out throughout the episode.  Also they do not ever let you see the credits of one because they are too busy promoting something else.  On segments of news, anchors tease audiences about a story throughout the broadcast and very often they reveal it at the tail end of the newscast or they never get to it at all.  This is done too frequently just to keep viewers tuned.  You can see what you want but you really have to put up with a lot to enjoy it, if you stay with cable and the networks.

     Television in the 1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’ was so much better because you had certain standards that were to be followed.  Some of them were kind of rigid but viewers did get lots of wholesome shows that were fun to watch and not too many commercials and no graphics on the screen that do not belong.

     Now if I want to see something I wait until the DVD or Blue Ray edition is out and watch in total freedom to enjoy whenever and whatever I want.  I have seen many boxed sets this way.  Among them are “Brothers and Sisters,” “Cheers,” and “Star Trek.”

     It’d be great if more things were released directly to DVD and Blue Ray instead of going to cable and network stations.

     Take care and I hope you find a way to enjoy what you watch.  

Not Much to Do?

By Gary Roen                   

     A few weeks ago I talked to several people.  I was surprised when all of them said “There is nothing to do around here.” I gathered they meant that there was nothing to do around the Central Florida area.  I find that statement to be so untrue.  I know that there are art shows in the next few months that are great fun to go to.  To begin with there is the Winter Park Art Festival in March.  You also have ones in Mt Dora, Cocoa, and New Smyrna Beach that are great to see all kinds of artwork and strange things...

     We have in March Bike Week while The Daytona Speedway has several races in the next few months as well.  If you like basketball there are the games of the Orlando Magic and this month the NBA All Star Weekend is here in Orlando.  In a month or so there will be baseball spring training all through the state and there are other sport events at Rollins College, UCF, Valencia and Stetson .

     The Bob Carr Center has many stage plays and the Orlando Ballet performances.  At the Amway Center when the Magic are not playing there are major shows like Elton John or Lady Gaga to name a few.  And there is the UCF arena that has brought to the area many exciting shows as well.

     For nightlife there are clubs all through downtown Orlando, or there is the night life of Disney or Universal Studios.

     For book readers there are many events across the area starting with Fresh Book Festival in Daytona Beach in January.  Later the Villages has its own author festival.  In April UCF has the UCF Book Festival, and in May there is Oasis, the science fiction convention.

     One of the best events that combines media, comics, and writer guests is the convention Megacon in either February or March that is a giant fun fest for three days.  This year’s con at the Orange County Convention Center starting on Friday February 17th and running until Sunday the 19th promises to be a wonderful experience for all.  Some of the guests slated to appear are Stan Lee, the creator of Marvel comics, Tony Bedard, who has worked on Green Lantern, and lots of other comic artists.  For others the draw are the media guests like Tim Russ Star Trek Voyager (Tuvok), Brent Spiner  Star Trek The Next Generation, (Data), Bruce Boxleitner, Babylon 5 (Capt. John Sheridan) (Tron) Alan, David Anders Vampire Diaries (John Gilbert), Alias (Julian)..

     Throughout the weekend there are talks by many of the guests about some of the shows they have been a part of, the making of shows or movies, where the industry is and where it’s going: For writers the subjects are the craft of writing or can science fiction contain religion?, and there are row after row of artists who have many pieces of art to display.  Authors can autograph their works while the actors will sign and talk to their many fans.  Also there are so many tables with dealers who sell copies of old tv shows, movies, old magazines and comics, or lots of other related things.

       I still say there is so much to do here that all you have to do is look around.  Megacon is a great fun family event that has gotten bigger and better through the years.  If you’re a Science Fiction or comic buff, this is the place to be. For or an aspiring professional this is the place to network, network, and network.  Come have fun and be like a kid in a candy store with all these magical things all around you.   For more information on prices, TV stars, artists and authors check out the cons website at www.megaconvention.com.

Life Without Hitch

It’s about 1 o’clock in the morning on Friday, December 16th and I just heard the news that Christopher Hitchens has passed away. As a tenured fan of his work and character I’m genuinely depressed to hear this news, but I can’t say that it comes as a great shock either. Back in June of 2010, Hitchens announced that he had been diagnosed with esophageal cancer; and given his propensity for treating his body more like a brothel than a temple, the outlook seemed pretty grim. While he endured for another year and a half, it was a steady decline. As perhaps one of the most erudite public speakers in generations, he suffered an especially cruel fate when cancer claimed his voice. I can think of nothing more disheartening than having one of your strongest assets stripped away and being forced to press on without it.

Yet, what impression did “Hitch” leave upon the world? Most notable would be his recent outspoken support of the “New Atheism” movement; but he was also wildly successful as an author, journalist, literary critic, orator, humanitarian, and pundit. His was a wit that knew no bounds. Fan and critic alike loved nothing more than whipping him into a trademark frenzy of haughty, sharply worded retorts, with which he would level even his most intellectual opponents.

Personally, one of my favorite events was the public debate, entitled “Is Religion a Force of Good in the World?” held between Hitch and former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair in November of 2010. As he strode out onto the stage, Hitch debuted his newly hairless head as well as a confidence that surprised even me. It is no small feat to accept an invitation to debate the former leader of your nation of birth, but Hitchens didn’t hesitate for one moment before verbally shutting Blair down. Watching the debate was like watching someone’s mind being read. Every time Blair made an argument in religion’s favor, it would somehow play into the logical ambush that Hitch had laid in the early moments of the debate. By the end, not only had Hitchens clearly won, he had convinced Blair that even if his faith hadn’t been misplaced, his argument certainly was. It was a magnificent public defeat of tired principles and dusty logical fallacies.

While it’s easy to get hung up on the brash, visceral element of his spoken word, Hitchens was even more effective with a pen. During his life he worked as a journalist for many prestigious periodicals such as The Atlantic and The Nation, until becoming a Contributing Editor to Vanity Fair in 1992. He authored 18 books, including his best seller “God is Not Great”, and contributed to dozens more as an editor or co-author.

As a humanitarian atheist, Hitch held that the world did not need a supernatural guardian or man-made dogmas in order to do right by one’s fellow man. It was this fervor for the greater good of understanding that often got in the way of Hitchens’ own professional life. On multiple occasions, he was fired from positions because of his unwillingness to bend to his editors’ agendas, and he often landed in hot water with the media for his typically heavy-handed critique of culture. He was a champion of a logic that knew no creed or party and would often cross political and social borders. This was exemplified in his simultaneous criticisms of George W. Bush’s policies and belief that the Iraq War was our nation’s virtuous duty. He would rail against the right, left or any person or party that, in his eyes, was acting on less than ethical principles. He was also never opposed to endorsing figures that he felt were acting in the greater good. His support of Ralph Nader in the 2000 presidential election showed that he was not above the process of politics, just one of its rarest supporters.

In so many ways, what we have lost in the personality of Christopher Hitchens is more than just the man himself. We have lost an irreverent voice of reason, whose place in society is not likely to be matched again in my lifetime. It was a voice that was unburdened by the pressures of politeness; indeed I would guess that Hitch felt there was very little time for anything but frankness in this modern age. He was as important to literary, political and intellectual society as he was entertaining and I will miss his influence greatly.

by Grant Nielsen

The Fantasy Effect

One of the first things I ever knew about John Lennon was that he had just been shot.  I was 10 years old on December 8th 1980, and I heard about it the following morning on the news right before heading out to catch the school bus.  I mentioned it to my mom, and I noticed she was visibly taken aback. I got the sense that something very significant happened, and the chatter prior to school with older students and a few grown-ups seemed to confirm this.

I really didn’t know that much about the Beatles prior. I knew they had been an incredibly popular rock band, and I was starting to really like rock music, but honestly, I was more of a Doors fan.  Their Greatest Hits album- that red & white one- ruled the roost around my way.  The only Beatles album in the house that my parents had was Sgt Peppers, and frankly, I didn’t care much for it. I recall thinking it looked and sounded like a big deal, but it never really said anything, just suggested it. Again, I was 10, a fascinating time to be a Doors literalist.

Within 24 hours of Lennon’s murder, I gleaned a bit more information from the ensuing news coverage.  I had figured out that he was the Beatle with the glasses. He was really into Peace, which made his untimely death a little more odd to me.  I learned he was married to a Japanese woman and they had a child.  I’ve come to realize it is fairly common for an artist’s passing to result in an increased awareness, but this was my first time experiencing this, and it was a biggie.

As fate would have it, John Lennon and his wife, Yoko Ono, had released  an album merely weeks before his death entitled Double Fantasy.  Rumor has it that the initial reaction was not very positive (one review proclaimed the album “a self-obsessed disaster”), but  the events that soon followed provoked a severe reworking of opinion.  Indeed, the album wound up going to the top of the charts and winning a Grammy for Album of the Year.  Decades later,  I’m of the opinion that the murder of John Lennon altered the sound of music in ways wholly unintended.

On Christmas morning of 1980, my mother gave my father a present to unwrap. Of course, based on it’s flat, square shape, it was pretty obvious it was an album. The times being what they were, it was pretty obvious which album.  I think this was the first new album brought into the house by either of my parents in at least a decade. I was fascinated by it. The artwork for Double Fantasy  was a fairly monochromatic affair, even down to the Geffen label pasted onto the vinyl.  Somehow, this lack of color seemed perfect for such a somber winter.

I couldn’t wait to hear this Important Record, but I had to, and adding insult to injury, I couldn’t even be in the same room when it was finally played. My aunt and uncle came by the following night to celebrate the holiday with my parents, my dad and uncle exchanging their traditional gift: identical fifths of scotch. My uncle was a musician, and kept up to date with musical trends (rifling through his collection was soon to be a favored pastime).   We had our Xmas tree and presents in the family room so we all hung out there for most of the evening, but as the grown-ups adjourned to the record-player containing living room, I was sent to bed.

Oh hell no. I knew what was about to happen. After my mom put us all to bed and went back downstairs, I crept from my room to the top of the staircase and set up camp.

To this day, whenever I hear that bell at the beginning of John Lennon’s “(Just Like) Starting Over,” I am taken back to that moment. I remember the lighting in the hallway at the top of the stairs. I remember hearing my family members as they were just out of sight.  Nowadays, I can recognize the style of the song as an homage of sorts to the rock and roll of his own youth,  but  it also takes me back to my own and that illicit thrill that can come with hearing such sounds. Furthermore, damn, that dude had the knack for killer middle eights.

As a whole, Double Fantasy was put together as a concept album. The concept being that John Lennon and Yoko Ono happened to be artists that shared a life together.  Many of the songs are likewise “partnered.” John’s “I’m Losing You” is followed by Yoko’s “I’m Moving On.” He has a song for his “Beautiful Boy,” she sings to her “Beautiful Boys.” He proclaims his love to his “Woman,” she acknowledges that “Every Man Has a Woman Who Loves Him.”

So, the album begins with one of his finest numbers, and Yoko comes to the plate for the second song with “Kiss Kiss Kiss.”

Holy. Shit.

She coos, she shrieks, she pretty much goes batshit insane. To this day, I still can’t tell if the backing musicians were really into it or just having a laugh playing “freaky ” for the paycheck, but Ono seems unfazed and in her own world, offering us only the glimpses she wants us to see.  For a preteen obsessed with the Lizard King, a lady yelling “BROKEN MIRROR WHITE TERROR!” is gold. She ends the song with some “sexy” noises a la Donna Summer, but frankly, it was kinda scary too.

Upstairs, my mind was blown. Downstairs, grownups were howling with laughter. I get it, I mean, she was strange, not for everyone, no doubt about it.  That’s the rub -when you get right down to it, we wouldn’t have been listening to her in the first place if John Lennon had still been alive. I imagine similar scenes happened all across suburbia that winter: because of his death, John Lennon “Trojan horsed” his wife’s weird art into hundreds of thousands of homes that wouldn’t have welcomed it otherwise.

It’s not like I became a fan of hers immediately upon hearing her, but it absolutely planted a seed.  Lennon may or may not have been misguided in his assessment that she had some kinship with the punk and new wave bands of that era, that can be debated, but I do know she made it into my house first, and I’m pretty sure that’s how it went down for quite a few others as well.

How much of a stretch is it from Yoko Ono to Cyndi Lauper? A hell of a lot shorter than it is from Pat Benatar, I’ll tell you that much.  Double Fantasy moved “weird” closer to the center.  A band wanting to show an allegiance to the underground is far more likely to cover one of her songs than one by her husband. If they *did* opt for a Lennon-penned number, odds are they’ll go with one written when she was around.  Heck, even Ono’s choice in eyewear has proven some longstanding merit if Lady Gaga is to be trusted.  Lennon’s influence as a songwriter is undeniable, but Ono’s influential role as a stylist deserves reassessment.

Would John Lennon really have been willing do die to get his wife’s artwork recognized on a larger scale? He probably would have said something along those lines, but that kind of thing never gets put to the test. Except when it does, and that’s when things get weird.

Tommy Salmon
Movement Magazine Athens GA correspondent

OCCUPY

FUCK!

Not as thrilled with the new COLDPLAY as I'd sort of hoped I would be. I will listen to more SUEDE to make up for it. Where are bands of their caliber today? Where is the new SUEDE? Where are the new Smiths? And I don't mean some fucking carbon copy, I mean an equally talented group of musicians making music that will change the world. Someone please fucking shake this shit up. Fuck this GaGa-gay-bar-top-40-vocoded-dime-store-rap shit! It is dumbing down our cattle-like society. Fucking wake up!