Log in

On the Feeling of Feelings - I'm on the downeaster alexa

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile
> Gushi Land!

February 9th, 2012

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
12:04 am - On the Feeling of Feelings

It was the weekend of September 23rd. I was in Seattle, a new town to me, for a convention. But I had other plans. I rented a car (a Crown Vic with all-leather interior), and drove the hour+ north to Bellingham, to see my long-time internet friend ravynwolf . Me, her husband and I spent the day hanging out and experiencing a city that was new, fresh, foreign and breathtaking to me. The entire time, I was astonished by its beauty, and the way nature seemed that much closer.

The entire time, I was wishing someone close to me were there with me.

When I headed home, around midnight, I tuned in a local radio station, and happened to hear a live music concert: it was Lady Gaga doing live renditions of most of her album, for the "IHeartRadio" debut, live in Vegas. At one point, Sting came on stage and sang "Stand By Me" with her, as she retold how many people in the music business had been cruel and cold, and Sting had been genuine.

She dedicated her song "Hair" to a Jamey Rodemeyer, who was a victim of bullying and had recently committed suicide.

And the crowd loved it. Driving through the pacific northwest, I shared in that.

All the music, everything, the scenery around me, felt real in a way that nothing else did, and at the time time, surreal and dream-like. Cruising in my couch-on-wheels through the darkness, I teared up.

And for weeks after, I tried to find a recording of that concert, to be able to explore these feelings some more. To evoke feelings brought about in my mind, by a series of sounds. Because I've hardened a bit, and being able to feel things -- is good.

I've found both a cut of that song, as well as a recording of the original concert in its entirety, on the kind of site where the MPAA and "the copyright holders" would have you believe you shouldn't download from. Because they own the content, and they would control your ability to feel what these things evoke.

Fuck them. I'd highly recommend anyone give it a listen. Here

(10 comments | Leave a comment)


Date:February 9th, 2012 06:31 am (UTC)
[User Picture]
Date:February 9th, 2012 07:00 pm (UTC)
You came up to Seattle and back and you didn't think to stop by and finally meet in person?

Have I offended you in some way Sir?
[User Picture]
Date:February 9th, 2012 08:53 pm (UTC)
Not at all, honestly I thought you were east coast now.

[User Picture]
Date:February 9th, 2012 08:55 pm (UTC)

East Coast

Ah. No worries then. :)

Nah. I've been here (Portland, Oregon) since August of last year.
Date:February 18th, 2012 04:13 pm (UTC)
if you choose not to pay the performer, for the use of their intelectual property, then they won't be able to pay their bills, and will have to get out of that business and then You will no longer be able to get any new product from that performer and so you would be stuck feeling the same old, same old, with no growth or potential for change & improvement
[User Picture]
Date:February 19th, 2012 12:26 am (UTC)
Are you spouting that music-industry nonsense just to try to be funny?

The point I was trying to make in the entry that this was a LIVE PERFORMANCE that was broadcast ONCE and there is (at this time) no way to buy it for any amount of money, and there was an emotion conveyed (and memories attached) to this specific performance that the album version (which I can/have bought) do not evoke.

If it were available, I'd happily pay for it. Just as I'd happily pay for a legal copy of the 1950's batman.


Date:February 19th, 2012 09:48 pm (UTC)
quite a number of my friends are authors or artists.

Some of them have a hard time paying their bills, and live just above the poverty level. a few have even died so poor, that their medical expenses had to be written off by medicare, when they died.

I understand about screwing over big business, but if it's done at the expense of the little guy, the singer, or the writer, or the artist, when they get kicked out of their apartment, because they can't pay their bills and have to become garbage collectors or construction workers, just to pay their bills, then it's just our society which dies a little bit
[User Picture]
Date:February 20th, 2012 04:38 am (UTC)
As are several of mine. Hello, Dad's an Author, uncle's a Rock Singer, remember?

And I'm all for buying the media you CAN buy from them to support them. What you've failed to address is when they put out media that you CAN'T buy. Note that I'm not saying "this is a rip of her last album, go grab it" -- it's a live performance that was NEVER RELEASED. It conveys different memories and emotions.

(I suppose if at some point the recording of this concert WERE released, there'd be the subject of some debate -- as is the question of whether accessing this media in this method makes an actual commercial release less likely).

This isn't about "screwing over big business". It's not about "sticking it to the man". I feel you're taking what's in essence the last paragraph of my post out of context.

Date:February 20th, 2012 10:14 pm (UTC)
"on the kind of site where the MPAA and "the copyright holders" would have you believe you shouldn't download from. Because they own the content, and they would control your ability to feel what these things evoke.

Fuck them. I'd highly recommend anyone give it a listen."

if that's not a direct quote of what you said, then I don't know how to copy/paste

You're saying the MPAA and "the copyright holders" would have you believe, they own the content, Fuck them

if it was just a case of it's not been release by a label yet, but you can get it here... but, oh no! you say to fuck the MPAA and the copyright holders and that's the message that people will remember
[User Picture]
Date:February 21st, 2012 12:51 am (UTC)
Jesus Christ.

Do you not see the difference between your direct quote of me, and your paraphrase? You are twisting my words.

I don't debate that they in fact legally own the content. I say it right there, with no sarcasm whatsoever. "Because they own the content,".

However, there's a word "would" that implies a conditional.

Please note the two phrases up there that have the word "would" in them? Those are the ones that have points I am debating.

In the first sentence ('the kind of site where the MPAA and "the copyright holders" would have you believe you shouldn't download from.'), I am debating, specifically, that in the MPAA's perfect world, there's no legitimate use for sites like that, period, for any reason at all, including my use of it, nor to download copyright-free media, alternate translations, fan-subtitles for episodes produced without closed captioning, tv shows that were never released to DVD and are off-air, et cetera, and that it is a catch-all blanket clause with no grey area, no legitimate use cases whatsoever.

In the second half of the second sentence, ('and they would control your ability to feel what these things evoke.'), I debate that in their perfect world, they've exposed you to media that you could have freely, LEGALLY recorded yourself off the radio (and in fact, the audio quality of the ensuing recording is lacking because it was ONLY radio-quality, so there is no "perfect digital copy" as there would be with a ripped CD), but since they do not make it available, you simply have no right to ever hear that version again.

However, it's clear we disagree here, and I am tired of putting energy into it. It is unlikely we will see things the same way or have a meeting of the minds.

> Go to Top