So I hear Jason Schwartzman is to star opposite Kirsten Dunst in an adaptation of Marie-Antoinette. The IMDB reports it is tentatively scheduled for release in '06. I'm excited -- for I long for the day that I can write in my blog, "wow, Kirsten! way to bed the best friend! ...and the other best friend!" By then she will have had her way with three of them. ("them" being the little social circle of the original members of phantom planet & co.)
Kirsten Dunst. Now there's a winner. But hey, these're the kind of people New Jersey breeds.. (You didn't actually think I could bring up Kirsten Dunst without including a quip about New Jersey, now, did you?)

for clarification: Kirsten and Alex Greenwald were a couple at one point in time, and then shortly afterwards, she moved on to his best friend of sorts Jake Gyllenhaal, and she will presumably inevitably become involved with Jason Schwartzman, Alex's other best friend of sorts.

EDIT: oh, by the way. Merry belated Christmas. Was yours as miserable as mine?

Don't brood, it's unbecoming.
I have a certain terribly unbecoming habit of inalienable trait: stuttering and making a spectacular ass of myself! I assure you, I do frequently make a spectacular ass of myself. And then I will, almost instinctively, foolishly vow never to speak again, hole up in my living quarters for several days standing firmly by my vow, and eventually wander outside into the world again after the feelings of intense self-loathing and embarassment (to an extent) have diminished or gone stale. I'll cross paths with people and gradually grate away their patience, entirely unaware that I have lost their respect the very day I thought I earned it at all. But that's what my redeeming qualities are for, silly! Fret not -- my sharp wit, winning charm, and irresistable magneticism compensate entirely, and then some! Oh wait, that may present a problem, seeing as I don't have any redeeming qualities -- only fatal flaws. I don't have any intellectual assets. That must be why I sit around and wonder why I don't have friends (and occasionally read books I hate which I commit acts of brutality against). If I weren't so critical of spirituality/the belief in a higher authority, I'd say some peculiar young deity were deriving pleasure from the irony of consistently rehashing one of the great self-evident truths of life to those who know it well -- the great self-evident truth being that at the end of the day, you have only yourself to rely on. Other people are fickle and can't be trusted. It doesn't bother me a bit. But I hope it bothers everyone else.

The more I get to know you, the more I grow to hate you. Remember when I noted that my relationship with people could be best described with the original (perceived) cleverism "The more I get to know you, the more I grow to hate you"? Well as it turns out, the feeling is mutual. Social interaction is like a game show. The overall effect I get from it is: Thirty seconds to prove you're worthy of this person's respect. Quickly. Chop chop! And before you know it, your thirty seconds are up, and you have failed. to prove. anything. and the peevish game show host is glaring at you with those taunting "chop chop!" eyes, because in The Life Game, there is absolutely no room for error.

You read me like a book. I hate that.
I've got people nagging me about my hair. NO, I will not change it, NO, I will not wear it up -- ughh, let me BE. I'm really touchy about my hair. We all have our neuroses, (perhaps I, more than you) and I think you should respect my wishes not to comply with your inane demands. And I refuse offer you any explanations or reasons or make any effort to convince you -- obviously I object for a reason, so drop it because your persistence will not wear away at my resistance. Don't push me; I don't respond well to being cornered!
And then I've got people challenging my refusal to have my picture taken. I'll..... probably evade you until I find some opportunity to sneak out the window in the bathroom. But you'll unwittingly have caused me enough psychological turmoil and internal conflict to last several days. I hope you're happy.

My life is funny. I should write a novella. But I won't. Because.... with my writing skills? God help us.

books I hate. + my barbaric acts of book-abuse

I hate Hemingway. I was reading The Old Man and the Sea yesterday, and I hurled the book against the wall with a vehement cry of "I hate this book!" My book was a yellowing, malodorous library copy (I don't suppose that's Hemingway's fault, though), making the temptation all the more irresistable. Hemingway is a chauvinist, I announced to myself decidedly. Possibly a misogynist as well, but I haven't read enough of his literary works as of late to be authorized to formulate any legitimate conclusion on that...

I hate Miss Lonelyhearts (Nathaniel West) more. Yes, yes, I'm sure there is a message to be communicated, and yes, I'm sure there's profound symbolic significance in everything, but I just cannot look past the vulgarities through which this supposed deep philosophical message I'm supposed to grasp is being presented to me. This writer gives us this unsympathetic, sadistic, disagreeable character with a penchant for violence and expects us to accept him as a Christ figure? I mean, I understand the anti-hero concept, but isn't this a (long) stretch? I hated it so much, I avoided it for about a day or two before resuming reading, because I found it hard to stomache in one sitting. It deals too much with religion and depravity and sexuality. I did assume the responsibility of finishing it, though, if only for myself, for the sake of leaving nothing unfinished. It was effective in moving me only to hurl the book at the wall and groan in disgust.
I am constantly at odds with myself, bitter, and helpless to modify my current situation and so I compensate by throwing literature against the wall.

What is up with me and my tireless quest for successful self-improvement?

This weeks brilliant ("brilliant") idea: PERIODICALS! In an ambitious effort to sharpen my mind, which is in dire need of sharpening, I've subscribed to half a dozen magazines with intentions of taking up feverish magazine-reading. I've also made a point of subscribing to the sunday New York Times in addition to my magazine overkill project.

Any recommendations for good satire zines? Not the onion, it's pretty mediocre. Come on, I'm serious. Comment one and all.

yeah, because we can all afford to pay our own rent.

That's right! Help the needy! Donate to the buy-Alex-new-jeans-that-he-can-destroy-and-reassemble-using-electrical-tape fund!

Alex says: "Buy our new dvd! Help pay my rent!" (he doesn't actually say this)
I can't say it comes as any shock to me, though. I never expected Alex to be above shameless self-promotion. Still. That is so low of you, Alex. Nonetheless... I will make a donation. I will succumb to the temptation to buy it, if only for the footage of 17-year-old Phantom Planet boys. But to put it midly, I am just a trifle put off by the reasoning behind this.
They can make a profit out of just about anything though, can't they?

Case in point: Negatives and Negatives 2. Their first b-sides CD, Negatives, was exclusive to fanclub members. Hence, you had to join the paid fanclub in order to obtain it. Not only do they expect you to invest in byproducts of their work -- oh, no! That's a sacred privilege granted only to fanclub members, who pay the annual $20 membership fee -- they require you to commit to the fanclub to do so. Oh, but the Negatives 2 compilation CD is available to everyone! So gracious of them to offer it to non-fanclub members, isn't it? ISN'T IT?
They do this in the name of capital, of course. They want to make it available to the percentage of fans who are not in and do not intend on joining the increasingly-exclusive paid fan club, because whoever handles their finances has realized, wisely, that more people would buy it if paid fanclub membership was not forced upon them in the transaction process. Rake in the profits!

Say what, Alex? You want it to be heard by a wider audience? Oh, well since that's what the band claims, that's what must be so.... right? BULLSHIT!
"Oh! Look this way! A compilation of songs we never cared for enough to complete and put on any of the albums. BUY IT, please!" And foolishly, we buy it. And I, I nobly maintain my position at first, and refuse to purchase it -- based on principle alone -- but eventually I do cave in! However, the lure of Negatives 2 is null and ineffective on me, (fortunately) because I hate their new material anyway. So I've been spared. See? This is why pirating music is justified. Come on! Let's pirate our "unethical" asses off! WHO'S WITH ME? (::tumbleweed::)

But yeah, I'll probably contribute to their pool of royalties, and buy the dvd. Begrudgingly, no less. Wait... no, I don't even know how to work my dvd player -- oh, but nevermind, I can watch it on my computer. (thoughts written aloud. disregard.) But Negatives 2? Fuck that. I need new jeans to destroy. Alex can just go on using his electrical tape for all I care. Besides. He doesn't do it right. Big obvious holes suck. Carrick's (Moore Gerety) jeans are better.

I used to like this band so much. Now I find myself agreeing with less... and less... and less... and less... and less of what they do.

Soft is playing two shows in LA this month, so go see them if you live there because they are EXCELLENT. I mean like.. EXCELLENT.
< /plug >

Man, do they have CONNECTIONS in the LA scene. So don't be surprised if you see pictures of them on Jacques's photography site afterwards.

I hold myself in lower regards than I ever have, just for filling out this survey and calculating my score. With it comes major loss of self-respect points. A devastating loss of 32 self-respect points, to be exact.

---

how scene are you? 32
**0-24 - poser! get out or be forced out.
**25-44 - beginner. attend more shows, buy more records, you'll be fine.
**45-74 - scenester. you've been around awhile and you know what's up, good job.
**75 - or more - GOD! i bow to thee with your knowledge of everything hardcore


1. studded belt - 2 points: 0

2. dyed black hair - 2 points: 0

3. thick rimed glasses - 2 points: 0

4. tight shirts/pants - 2 points each: 2

5. gaudy belt buckle - 2 points each: 0

6. clothing bought from a thrift store - 2 points each: 4

7. having hair with bangs longer than the rest - 2 points: 0

8. trucker hats - 2 points: 0

9. messenger bag - 3 points: 0

10. livejournal/myspazz/friendster account - 2 points each: 4

11. saucony/new balance/converse shoes - 2 points per pair: 0

12. mountian climbing key thingy - 2 points: 2

13. X'd up mosh gloves - 10 points: 0

14. scarf - 2 points: 0

15. refering to bands as acronym - 2 points: 2

16. vegan diet - 5 points: 0

17. vegitarian diet - 4 points : 0

18. food not bombs participation - 5 points: 0

19. straight edge - 5 points: 0

20. aspiring photographer - 3 points: 0

21. using adj from the late 80's
early 90's (i.e. rad, gnarly, rockin', etc.) 1 point for each: 0

22. pins/buttons 1/2 point each: 0

23. plugs/body piercings - 2 points each: 0

24. vinyl collection - 10 points: 0

25. moldy peaches fan - 10 points: 10

26. liking metal seriously - deduct 5 points: 0

27. liking metalcore - 5 points: 0

28. reading books over 300 pages long - 3 points: 3

29. riding a bike - 5 points: 0

30. participating in "the mosh" - 5 points: 5

31. tea aficianado - 5 points: 0

32. writing poetry - 5 points: 0

33. attended 50 shows or more in a year - 2 points: 0

34. attending hell fest - 5 points: 0

35. being in a band - 5 points: 0

36. working at an indy record store/health food store - 5 points: 0

37. clapping durring midpaced part of a song - 0 points: 0

---

Here's what is wrong with this survey, and its direction of bias: the poor, misguided fool(s) who wrote this is under the impression that everyone's ultimate goal in life is to be "scene", and that if we aren't "scene" enough, we are wrong and ought to strive harder to be. (Also, the person neglects to mention siren festival and coachella.)

Additionally, the person(s):
- uses the word "poser". I disapprove. alternateen vernacular has no place in pseudo-intellectual society..... nor in my vocabulary.
- has evidently received misinformation that scenesterdom is to be looked kindly on
- is unaware that there is any anti-scenester sentiment present on the internet on which this survey is circulating
- is under the misconception that "awhile" is a word.
- ridiculously misspells the words vegetarian ("vegitarian"), aficionado ("aficianado"), and indie ("indy").

Well, congratulations, you've taken scenesterdom to absurd new heights! Until now, it has (as a subculture) been relatively subtle about its pretension, but wow! Nevermind being discreet or denying the pretentious undertones found in the values and fundamental beliefs scenester culture holds dear. No, go right on ahead and admit it like there is absolutely nothing wrong with it! When did scenesters begin embracing, rather than rejecting, pretension? Since the very moment they evolved into a breed of their own? ..... It's hard to make a distinction.

Okay, so now that that is out in the open, I ask that you kindly withhold your judgements of me based on my "scene points" (about 1/3 of them came from "moldy peaches fan" anyway) and instead, focus on all the things I didn't receive any "points" for to accurately determine where I am really located on the map of indie rock culture. That is to say, if the center and capital of all things "scene" is here, then I am way the hell





-------------------------------------------------> over here.

Lay off the pot, dear.

Look! My monstrous mutant pupil is devouring my iris!

I went to the ophthalmologist this morning. I'm happy to report that she's a little more competent than my physician. She put all kinds of drops in my eyes that stung like a bitch (while I squirmed) and prodded at my eyeballs, and then instructed me to sit in the waiting room for twenty minutes, all in preparation for examining my eyes. So I sat obediently in the waiting room in excruciating pain, waiting for the drops to take effect, and resisting the urge to gouge my eyes out. When I left, I noticed an increased sensitivity to light, so I wore sunglasses around all afternoon. When I took them off for a moment, I learned that what the drops did was dilate my pupils. My pupil looked like it was trying to swallow my entire eyeball. (Keep in mind that this was several hours after the ophthalmologist appointment, after the effects wore off a bit.) I looked like I was hopped up on something.

shut up, people with glasses. I'd never had a dilated pupil exam prior to today, okay?