Majesticles

I sat up in my room one day,
And glanced down at my testicles.
I thought "cor blimey, these are great!"
And christened them majesticles.
Of course, I'm not alone in this
And so I thought about the resticles.

There are exorcists who drive out ghosts,
Who have a pair of possessedicles.
Rioters, hippies and political activists
All sport marvellous protesticles.
The Pope, hidden beneath his frock,
Has a heavenly set of blessedicles.
And cowboys, why they of course
Have powerful Wild Westicles.

Emos cram into their skinny jeans
Some pitiful depressedicles,
Policemen on a daily basis,
Fiddle with their arresticles.
DJs at the discos are inclined
To take requesticles.
And Northerners hold cans of Stella
Alongside their string-vesticles.

Rats and termites, wasps and flies
Have their little pesticles,
For Stalkers following their victims:
Tightly drawn obsessedicles.
Basil Fawlty had much trouble
Dealing with his guesticles,
Comedians, if controversial,
Are proud of all their jesticles.

If I've left you out, don't worry
Or you may end up with stressedicles.
If you can think of more, please do!
And send me your suggesticles.
All men have them, young and old,
All through their life long questicles.
And if you haven't got a pair,
Instead, you should have breasticles.

by Rhys Laverty

Inspiration Strikes

Meg White can't drum.

A fair statement? A lot of indie folk and hipsters would say so. It's a judgement constantly passed on The White Stripes. Being pretty taciturn about all things, neither Meg nor her guitarist-demigod-counterpart, Jack White, have never really responded to these "allegations". Until now.

In a brief article I read today on the NME website, Jack White has been quoted as saying to the New York Post:

"Her femininity and extreme minimalism are too much to take for some metalheads and reverse-contrarian hipsters...She can do what those with 'technical prowess' can't. She inspires people to bash on pots and pans. For that, they repay her with gossip and judgement."

I loved this. I've never been in the Meg-bashing camp, and Jack White has said it all really. The White Stripes have undoubtedly produced some of the greatest and most accessible rock music of the 21st century, and Jack White here points out the inspiration Meg induces.

This got me thinking about the musicians who have inspired me the most, through both their music and character:

1. Kurt Cobain
Sift through the heroine and mythos. You'll find a man with a heart on his sleeve. He plugged unkown bands he loved. He was the figurehead of alternative rock's breakthrough. Another reluctant voice for a generation. He stuck it the man when need be, playing the intro to the forbidden song "Rape Me" on MTV, nearly causing MTV to cut transmission. And he wrote some incredible tunes. Smells Like Teen Spirit and Lithium still sound immense.

2. Beck
Music's eternal magpie. Country to hip-hop to metal. He's experimented, spliced, sampled, collaborated. Listen to his album 'Odelay!'. Unlike most experimental artists, he's also a hugely gifted songwriter (listen to his 'Sea Change'album). His latest project is The Record Club. He gets together a load of musicians (including MGMT and Wolfmother) covering an entire classic album in a day. Genius idea. Shame he's a Scientologist though.

3. Ezra Koenig
Who? The frontman of Vampire Weekend, that's who! Self confessed geeks, lot is made of Vampire Weekend's squeaky clean image. I don't think this is any point for criticism. They've shown illegal substances aren't necessary for making exotic, exciting music. Ezra Koenig just seems so sincere whenever I hear any interviews. I saw the band live in July; Koenig clearly wasn't inebriated but was still a fantastic onstage character.

Those are three musicians I quickly thought of who inspire me, for various reasons. How about you?
What musicians inspire you and why?
Are you even inspired by any? If not, you're listening to the wrong ones.

2010 - A Year For Music

If you've read even half a sentence in passing of one of my blogs, you'll know that I'm a huge lover of music and a huge hater of the charts. No change here I'm afraid. 2010 is seeming like an incredible year for music as far as I can see. Here are the albums out so far (we're only halfway through March!) that I've fallen in love with:

Vampire Weekend- "Contra"
Gorillaz- "Plastic Beach"
Yeasayer- "Odd Blood"
Liars- "Sisterworld"
Beach House- "Teen Dream"
These New Puritans- "Hidden"
Titus Andronicus- "The Monitor"
Frightened Rabbit- "The Winter of Mixed Drinks"
Hot Chip- "One Life Stand"
Los Campesinos!- "Romance is Boring"
The Magnetic Fields- "Realism"

Seriously, these are all quality. If you haven't heard of them then PLEASE investigate! Seriously, they're all quality albums. If you think I'm assuming an "indier than thou" position well I'm sorry for avoiding the ready-meal style of the charts.

In addition to this, there are some albums I am incredibly excited about which have yet to be released!

Laura Marling- "I Speak Because I Can" (although I've heard all the songs, legally, already!)
The National- "High Violet"
MGMT- "Congratulations" (more anxious than excited...)
The Hold Steady- "Heaven is Whenever"
Of Montreal- "False Priest"
LCD Soundsystem- TBA
The Strokes- TBA (again, more anxious than excited...)
Arcade Fire- TBA

Those are the biggies at the moment! I'm loving this year musically. If not as a whole, I'm having a fantastic personal journey. There are so many great, individual, original, honest bands appearing; earning their stripes and making the effort to appeal to fans and listeners in new ways. There are no discernible trends or scenes dominating, apart from the ever more loathsome "femtronica" movement (Ellie Goulding, I'm looking in your uninspired direction)

So yeah, that's my report on Music in 2010 as of the 15th of March. How about you? Have you got any tips for upcoming artists or albums? Things I've missed and should be listening to? Please do feed back to me :) God Bless you.

One Singular Sensation?

I'm going to hope that you've all heard of Pink Floyd- mammoth stars of 70s prog rock, sonic innovators, musical genii. The creators of legendary, multi-million selling and frickin' awesome albums like "The Dark Side of the Moon" and "The Wall".

Now if you've been reading the papers or music news in the last day or two, you'll have seen that the Floyd are suing their old record label EMI. Why you ask? Well I'll tell you.

The music of several of history's biggest rock acts- The Beatles, ACDC, Oasis and, of course, Pink Floyd- has, for various reasons, not been incredibly available (legally) on the internet, iTunes, Spotify etc. Recently however, the Pink Floyd catalogue hit iTunes.
And beef has arisen.
Pink Floyd don't want their songs available individually- they only want whole albums to be sold. Today, it was announced that they'd won the court case and EMI owe them £40,000 in costs. I was immensely happy about this! Why?

This story highlights one of the things about the 21st century music industry which truly distresses me. That is that music is now viewed primarily by major labels and casual music listeners as a commodity. Not as art.

If you know anything about Pink Floyd, you'll know that they are "album artists". Whilst they've written incredible individual songs like Money, Another Brick in the Wall Pt. 2 etc. they've never been keen on singles. Their albums are DESIGNED, RECORDED AND PRODUCED as one cohesive whole. Not as a series of bytes to be packaged for preference. Their albums are journeys which they blazed for you to experience every step of.

You may think that EMI and iTunes have the right to sell individual tracks whenever they wish. It's their policy, why should Pink Floyd be exempt? The answer is: because this is art we're talking about. Not a commercial product.

Just because Pink Floyd are a commercially successful rock band, you should NEVER make the mistake that what they produce isn't art. It would make no sense to sell only sections of a painting. Or individual scenes from a film/TV show. This shouldn't be any different. And if the vision of the musician/artists is for the whole album to be a whole then that should be respected.

Music should never be primarily about turning a profit. It should be about purpose and expression. If you haven't found an album that you love as a whole, then PLEASE- go and find one! Few things in your musical life will compare to getting lost in an album, knowing its grooves, nooks, crannies, ideas, motifs and energies. "Artists" and labels who concern themselves with bashing out individual tracks that are going to bring the money rolling in have no respect for you, me, other listener or for music itself. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with "big tunes" or dancefloor fillers- but they need to have some heart. Some vision. Even if that vision is just to inspire dance or a singalong, it should be a pure vision. An original vision.

We live in a world of one hit wonders. "Artists" are picked, produced and packaged for consumption. They're aimed purely at brief yet profitable stay in the charts, riding on a couple of intentionally commercial singles. How many of you know songs by JLS/Ludacris/Chris Brown et al OTHER than their singles? Hmm?

With the ability to cherry pick tracks on iTunes, Spotify etc. the art form of the album is in very obvious danger. That's why you see bonus tracks only available with the whole album. It's why lots of indie/lesser known bands offering special extras with hard copies of their albums. For artists like that, it isn't about turning a profit. It's about integrity. About getting a whole idea/movement/display across. About giving something to the fans rather than getting something from the customers.

We've got to embrace that. If not, we're just cheating ourselves.

What do you think? Should more albums be available only as a whole? Do you reckon lots of artists/labels would start doing that purely for commerical gain? Please do feedback to me!

God Save The Queen?

You may or may not know that I'm set to represent my school along with 2 of my schoolmates in the Rotary Youth Speaks Regional Finals on 13th March. It's a public speaking contest for schools across the country. If we win the next round, we go to the Nationl Finals. I was drafted in at short notice to replace the previous main speaker for our team and I was given his speech and made it my own, so credit to him.

The subjest is "The Case Against the Monarchy". I wasn't too swayed either way previously, but since entering the competition and researching this speech, I'm fully convinvced we need to be rid of it. Below is an abridged version of the speech!



INTRO
-In January we were told we'd risen out of recession. Many people have been suggesting the whole of western society needs to be reshuffled in the wake of it. This should prompt us to think about clearing out the most ancient of British institutions: THE MONARCHY.

DEMOCRACY
-It's the epitome of unfairness. People say the royals have a bit of class, they certainly do. Britain will continue being bound by social class with the monarchy still in place.

- We suppose Britain is a democracy. Democracy is an ideal we can't fully achieve. But we have to strive for it, uncompromisingly as the fairest form of governement. In order to do that, it makes no sense to have a head of state symbolic of a bygone, undemocratic age.

- Parliament can't even vote to abolish the monarchy, as it would be treason under the 1848 Treason Felony Act!

FINANCES
- You might know "the 67p figure". This is the supposed cost of the monarchy per person, per year. But it is a total lie. The government simply fabricate the lowest acceptable sum for the monarchy and divide it by the 60 million people in the UK.

- The actual cost has been but at £180million a year. This equals 9000 NHS Nurses' wages for a year, and is 100x the cost of the Irish Presidency- a system not only fairer but cheaper!

- Disgracefully, Parliament can ONLY INCREASE the amount of money The Queen (worth £349million) receives annually, under the 1972 Civil List Act!

TOURISM
- People say the royals earn their keep bringing in millions in tourism. This assumes the London tourist industry would be crippled if we abolished the monarchy. This is absurd! No one goes to Buckingham Palace for a quick chinwag with old Liz!

- Millions more could be made if we abolish the monarchy and turned palaces into museums. It could become a historial attraction, like the Nazis...

THE WINDSORS
- The monarchy system is bad for the Windsor family!

- Charles has had his life ruined. He can only prepare for one job that he may not even get and has had his entire life scrutinised by the media

- And for what? He's now known primarily by my generation as the favourite punching bag of BBC Panel Show Mock The Week.


NATIONAL IDENTITY
- Many say the monarchy is part of our national identity, removing it would remove part of ourselves. We need to look at my generation the future to answer this.

- I asked a sample of people my age to name all of the Queen's children. None of them could. I asked tell me what the Prince's Trust did. Hardly any could.

- Older folk may believe the monarchy is part of our national identity. My generation though, neither truly knowns nor cares.

- Looking at our past, some of the biggest leaps in British society have come from opposing the monarchy e.g the Magna Carta, 1689 Bill of Rights

CONCLUSION
- An immediate disolution of the monarchy would be impractical and damaging. But we need to begin phasing out this tired and irrelevant

- It can't survive apathetic generation, or the impending prospect of one European super state

- A king is a king, not because he's a successful politician or has united a country behind them. He is King because he is born. We leave the selection of our Head of State, our representative on the world stage, the symbol of our British values to that wonderfully unpredictable thing - the accident of birth

- So I urge the country, ‘Make Monarchy History.’


PLEASRE, FEEDBACK, QUESTION, ARGUE!
THANKS FOR READING!