Not the 2000th Post
How silly of me. Instead of 1,199, I read 1,999. Oh well. I thought the milestone point would be a good time to revisit Andrew W.K., one of my seasonal passions at the time when I started the blog. I can't recollect all of them, but I do remember some of the most recent: these include This Is Hell (2008), Epsilons (2006), Futureheads (2005), Cramps (2004), Andrew W.K. (2003). There was nothing in 2007, because it was a dark time for me.
Sure, I didn't start this blog until 2005, so my account is already flawed. Whatever, I suppose the fascination sustained. The main point is this: I fell in love with Andrew WK because I could never figure out if he was a full of shit, or a real-life, sincere, crazy-eyed Pollyanna. It's an interesting study of irony. If the persona is totally consistent, what measure do we have judging the existence of irony? And Andrew WK's persona was 100% consistent; there was not a single chink in the armor of his optimism, not in his music, not in his writing. His image might have suggested a different message, but he had a creative solution for integrating its recklessness into a broader "live for the moment" message.
So why is it a good time to revisit the subject, even if it isn't the 2000th post? Because 5 years have evolved Andrew WK. He got tired of the schtick. And with the passage of time, we know that he was
indeed, full of shit.
Andrew WK appears to have revamped his whole MO to be less optimistic and more "deep" or clever. This bothers me. I was hoping, against all the odds, and against all my knowledge of this our sad world, that it just might be possible for one simple guy out there to keep believing. I should have known better: no one can bounce back from disappointment indefinitely, no matter how much the simpleton. It was just another sham and gimmick.
Sure, I didn't start this blog until 2005, so my account is already flawed. Whatever, I suppose the fascination sustained. The main point is this: I fell in love with Andrew WK because I could never figure out if he was a full of shit, or a real-life, sincere, crazy-eyed Pollyanna. It's an interesting study of irony. If the persona is totally consistent, what measure do we have judging the existence of irony? And Andrew WK's persona was 100% consistent; there was not a single chink in the armor of his optimism, not in his music, not in his writing. His image might have suggested a different message, but he had a creative solution for integrating its recklessness into a broader "live for the moment" message.
So why is it a good time to revisit the subject, even if it isn't the 2000th post? Because 5 years have evolved Andrew WK. He got tired of the schtick. And with the passage of time, we know that he was
indeed, full of shit.
Andrew WK appears to have revamped his whole MO to be less optimistic and more "deep" or clever. This bothers me. I was hoping, against all the odds, and against all my knowledge of this our sad world, that it just might be possible for one simple guy out there to keep believing. I should have known better: no one can bounce back from disappointment indefinitely, no matter how much the simpleton. It was just another sham and gimmick.
posted by Rex at 11:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home