Last Week's Jam Tracks IV

Here's the tracks from last week's jam tracks from the local pub. 

The first track we played was Sunshine of Your Love (a staple of ours-me and martin my drummer friend), but this time it was performed with Jim, the house drummer at the open jam and an unknown bassist to me. The bass player is very good, as is Jim, which makes the guitar playing and singing very easy to do. I'm pretty proud of the solo I did here on Sunshine, a mix of straight up blues rock Hendrix-esque licks with a bit of shred. I like how when we ended the song I played the riff to Day Tripper retardando haha. That cowbell though! 

The next tune we played was Steve Vai's Bad Horsie. I still haven't gotten the hang of playing this so off the cuff and never practicing it with the musicians I play it with but I tried it again. Here it sounded pretty good with Jim's drumming and Bassist X's bass sound. I went for a super fast shred solo here. I really dig that melody and that metal riff. Steve Vai is a pretty big influence.

This week my drummer friend Martin couldn't make it so I played with the ace drummer Jim and this mysterious Bassist X dude with long hair and glasses, it turned out pretty well. My guitar sounded really great here, it sounds really in tune!  

https://soundcloud.com/orlando-figueroa-17/sunshine-of-your-love-cool-bass-and-drums
https://soundcloud.com/orlando-figueroa-17/bad-horsie

Last Week's Jam Tracks III

Here are the live tracks from last week's open jam at Petie's Place, this bar I frequent a lot.

The first tune we played was Black Sabbath's Paranoid, pretty easy song right? Well, I did kind of mess up the song last week because I forgot to come in w/ some verses and instead just went into a guitar solo, then found my place back within the song. That's how you cover up a mistake folks, go into impromptu guitar solo mode! I'm still working on bringing more emotion into the singing.

Next, we played Sunshine of Your Love by the Cream. This has been like our swansong so to speak. Sometimes hearing my voice makes me cringe hard but when I hear the guitar playing I think again (lols). My vocals are definitely getting better but its still hard to get past that speaking voice to singing voice transition. Ken, the percussionist playing tambourine (and records everything for me, thank you) is really on point with his rhythm here. With him and my friend Martin on drums its like playing with two drummers. Martin takes care of fills and colour and Ken takes care of timing with precision.

The last tune we played was an improvised version of Steve Vai's Bad Horsie. I have a habit of doing impromptu versions of guitar instrumentals by shredders (check out this version of Buckethead's Soothsayer here). The melody from Bad Horsie is pretty strong here, a bluesy funky sort of melody that runs into some metal riffing. The way we did it this time I stopped playing and motioned Martin to do a drum solo. As you can hear it sounded pretty damn good. My friend Martin is really coming into his own as a rock and roll drummer. At the end I did some tapping and held a note for what seemed like eons while Martin played some crazy rolls. That's pretty cool.

Here are all the tracks, enjoy!

https://soundcloud.com/orlando-figueroa-17/paranoid-forget-the-verse-ha
https://soundcloud.com/orlando-figueroa-17/sunshine-of-your-love-latest-version
https://soundcloud.com/orlando-figueroa-17/steve-vai-bad-horsie-impromtu-jam-version

Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus

Hello everybody! Here I'd like to discuss Mary Shelly's Frankenstein, which I literally just finished reading just now. The book was inspired by Mary Shelly and her friends friends who used to tell each other ghost stories around the campfire, they all decided they should all write their own ghost story and whoever wrote the best one, that one would get published. This is the only one that got done and published folks. Its quite good and inspired movie(s), cartoons, video games, and much more. The first unedited version was written and published in 1819, making this the oldest science fiction I've ever read, wow!

This book can be a little difficult to get into at first. Everybody knows the story of Frankenstein and the book only differs from the movie in some slight ways. For example, the monster here is eloquent and quite poetic, however, that is just the writing, times, and style of the book. The writing is quite formal, which is expected of the time in which it was written. For instead of thinking of the monster as eloquent, its more evident that the monster is a product of the times (1819) and that he is still quite evil despite his mastery of persuasion and making the reader feel sympathy for the state of this pathetic wretch.

The main difference from the book and the 1930s movie we've all seen is that Victor Frankenstein (the creator, mad scientist) gets a full biography and history where we learn near the end that the woman he is to marry is a childhood friend that his family took in, almost like a sister, which to me was a little incestuous but otherwise not that different from the movie. In addition, his monster torments and kills members of his family in the book, whereas in the movie the monster accidentally kills a villager's daughter. Also, the ending of the book is quite different from the movie, but I do like that after all is said and done our monster runs away like a thief into the night. It was quite a fitting ending for what could be construed as science fiction horror.

Today we look at this kind of thing and call it horror but back at its inception this type of writing would be considered science fiction. Mary Shelly's writing here is quite stylized; formal, educated, high art of a certain style. Its definitely a product of its time and I could see some people having trouble getting used to the literary style. I've found that I really enjoy these old types of science fiction writings, especially by women, they have a certain voice that men don't have. I suspect I'll learn more about this as I read more and more science fiction by female authors. I just ordered Ursula K. Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness, which is a sort of feminist cyberpunk sort of thing. I'm looking forward to reading that next.

However, Frankenstein is a hellova novel. I liked it so much that I'll probably want to read it again in the future, probably some months or years down the line. There's a sensation of eerie evil doings alongside justice in this book and it seems to do it in a literary personable voice rather than just being sinister just because. It's great, and if you like the movie then you should definitely check out the book.

"Cursed, cursed creator! Why did I live? Why, in that instant, did I not extinguish the spark of existence which you had so wantonly bestowed? I know not; despair had not yet taken possession of me; my feelings were those of rage and revenge. I could with pleasure have destroyed the cottage and its inhabitants and have glutted myself with their shrieks and misery."

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri is a drama movie written, directed, and produced by Martin Mcdonagh. The film follows a mother who puts up three billboards outside her town after the police fail to find out who raped and killed her daughter. Its been seven months and no arrest. These billboards say "RAPED WHILE DYING", "AND STILL NO ARRESTS?", and "HOW COME, CHIEF WILLOUGHBY?" Needless to say this polarizes the community.

Actress Frances McDormand plays such a fantastic grieving mother and we feel so much sympathy for her despite her doing some terrible and illegal things like setting the police building on fire and insulting the dignity of a midget (Peter Dinklage) that wanted to take her out to dinner and be there for her in a trying time.

The movie mostly revolves around a white town (in Missouri) that is pretty damn racist, where most of the cops are country hicks, real redneck types. The movie is about the characters and emotional seriousness that isn't seen too often in Hollywood blockbusters. This one is a little sad. In the end we don't know what emotions to have, other than the ones we initially had at the beginning of the film when she first puts up the bill boards.

The movie did very well at the box office. At the 75th Golden Globe Awards, the film won the awards for Best Motion Picture – Drama, Best Actress – Drama (McDormand), Best Supporting Actor (Rockwell), and Best Screenplay-wow! So the masses (regular johns) really loved this movie. I can see why, its quite effective at what it does, intrigue and inquiry, we want to keep learning more and more until the end where we get a non-ending. 

The film ends with a stupid cop and McDormand (playing Mildred, the grieving mother) going to the state of Idaho to find this guy who is supposedly a rapist, and even though the police commissioner told him that his dna didn't match the murdered girl's killer, they still want to go to his place and kill him. But they're not quite sure if they want to go on with the murder, so they agree that they will decide on the way there. That's how the movie ends, essentially a non-ending to which my friend said, "They're just going to end it like that." "Guess so." Its a pretty good ending for what I consider to be a non-linear movie.

The movie doesn't have any particular linear direction where it hits a climax and then things fizzle out, and then climax again, nothing really like that. Instead, a ton of different things happen throughout the film and all of it works in an effective way, everything has a lasting effect in the movie, its very well done. This movie is a more effective movie than The Shape of Water, which I also saw today. I would say this is the better movie but that I liked The Shape of Water better because fundamentally this movie is so serious and goes into the realm of losing a child in such a violent, brutal way, that in many respects I just can't understand that. I can, but only up to a point. The movie is quite transgressive, but again, in a effective way. You should definitely see it if you haven't yet.

Mildred Hayes: So how's it all going in the nigger- torturing business, Dixon?
Dixon: It's 'Persons of color'-torturing business, these days, if you want to know. And I didn't torture nobody.

The Shape of Water

The Shape of Water is a fantasy (and somewhat science fiction) drama film directed by Guillermo del Toro and written by del Toro and Vanessa Taylor (of tv and movie fame, she wrote for seasons 2 and 3 of Game of Thrones). The film follows a mute custodian woman working in a security government facility, where she befriends and falls in love with an amphibian creature. Think creature from the black lagoon except this creature is way too cute and human-like. 

Anyways, the plot is simple enough. The woman frees our amphibian dude from the lab where she falls in love with him, and they even have sex! She has a great ass by the way and the film has a bit of sexual sensuousness. There's a couple scenes where we see her masturbating, always in the tub full of water. But I digress. 

It must be said with utmost authority that actress Sally Hawkins (who plays Elisa the lead female role) makes this movie, the monster doesn't add much. Her acting is so lovely, so pure, and in the scene where she was singing I got caught up in her poetic elegance. Back to the story. 

So she frees him (the monster) and the bad guys from the facility eventually find out she has him. The bad guy shoots our amphibian and our girl, and they both die. However, the amphibian heals himself, surprise! He has a healing factor! What is this Logan? After he heals his bullet wound in a second he slashes our bad guy across the face, killing him instantly. If he was this god-like and powerful why was he chained up and beaten so easily earlier in the film? After that he takes Elisa (our girl) and jumps into the river (they were at a harbor where he was to be transported elsewhere but plans got sent to hell), where a sort of magikal realism occurs.

At this point we can choose to believe that a) Elisa gets killed and that the monster turns her scars into gills, thus turning her into a sort of reverse mermaid or b) the monster grabs Elisa and jumps into the river, and what we see is an illusion scene of love, fantasy, and romance, showing that Elisa's love for the monster has transcended human nature, that she has become like him, thus the gills. Either way its quite an interpretative ending, albeit a lazy one. 

Another complaint is that the monster was too damn cute and puppy-like. A true monster by definition has to be ugly, perhaps even disturbed in some ways, think Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. This monster was not a 'true' monster, in fact, other than him eating the head off a cat and killing the bad guy, he was hardly monster-like. Instead, del Toro relies on a cutesy Disney sort of love affair, effective enough for Best Director and Best Score at the 75th Golden Globes but it doesn't satisfy me in any realistic way. The film tries to allow Elisa to transcend human nature with this love story but it doesn't get the nitty gritty down right. The devil's always in the details. 

However, I can see why this movie is such a success. I can see why women and girls especially like it a lot, it is very much a romantic type of thing. This is the kind of movie you would bring a date to, or your girl friend, perhaps even your wife if she's open to different kinds of movies. Its quite good and I enjoyed it very much but the monster isn't really a true monster, he's a sort of cute puppy dog, which I can see why the girls would like the film and the creature. 

Giles: [interpreting Elisa] When he looks at me, the way he looks at me... He does not know, what I lack... Or - how - I am incomplete. He sees me, for what I - am, as I am. He's happy - to see me. Every time. Every day. Now, I can either save him... or let him die.

Metropolis (novel)

Hey! What's up everybody? Its been quiet on this page the last couple days because I've been pretty tired and I took a night off from my work (reading) so I was behind with my readings. Now I'm all caught up, as I've already finished another novel, this time Metropolis written by German female intellectual Thea von Harbou. Metropolis is also the name for the movie that was made and inspired by this book. The book came first, and the movie thereafter.

The story of the book follows closely the movie so rather than rehash what I already wrote about you can get the gist of the plot from my movie synopsis, which can be read here. There's actually not much information on this book on the Wikipedia page for it but it should be known that the end of this book concludes with Freder's father realizing that his dead wife will be with him till the ends of the Earth (she died and left a letter for him). Lets focus on the literary style and high art that is this novel.

The novel is a short two hundred and fifteen pages but the writing style can be hard to wrap your head around. This is high German art language and Thea von Harbou was quite the intellectual, you can tell by the English translation of her writing. Don't get me wrong, its not dense by any means but there's a sense that you have to really understand everything you're reading because its so highly stylized. One sentence that describes a simple thing could turn into a whole page affair but she does it in a way that you want to read more about that one thing, without making it boring or trivial. Its quite something, I don't think I've ever read anything quite like this, its a powerful novel.

The film omits references that the book made to the occult. There's tons of references and images to the occult here but because I'm not familiar with that realm I didn't see it as particularly offensive or foul by any means. I learned about some evil things I suppose but its nothing that's going to make me wet the bed at night (lol). Besides, the pentagram beside the machine-woman is pretty evil enough for 1927.

In addition, the film omits moral motivation for certain actions by the main characters. Yes, the book differs quite a bit from the movie's characters, which are more black and white. In the book the characters are much more detailed, much like real people. We don't necessarily see things as good or evil, there's all these gray areas that are quite apparent.

This book is great! I would recommend the book to any science fiction readers, women that want to get into science fiction, and people who like really old books. I liked it so much I might read it again much sooner than expected, I could see myself reading it again in a few months or so, just to see if it still has that same poetic fire and intensity from the first read through. Definitely check this book out.

HEAD and HANDS need a mediator. THE MEDIATOR BETWEEN HEAD AND HANDS MUST BE THE HEART!

Kindred

Kindred is a time travel slave narrative written by Octavia Butler, an important black female science fiction writer from California. In Kindred a black woman (named Dana) in 1976 is transported to early 19th century Maryland (pre-Civil War), where she meets her ancestors, Rufus (white slave owner) and Alice (a black free woman forced back into slavery later in life).

The book is a first person account from Dana's point of view. She has a lot of trouble adjusting to becoming a slave, and the descriptions of events that happen to her and other slaves is horrifying. Butler has described the work as 'a grim kind of fantasy'. The novel takes into account power, gender, race issues, and speculates on future egalitarianism. Although this is science fiction because of its powerful portrayal of slave life this book is often a required reading for high school classes exploring African American literature.

Now I'd like to go into more detail about some of the topics that come to light from this book.

First, the story is from a woman's point a view, and a black woman at that. You could say its a sort of feminism but the idea of the strong black female protagonist isn't portrayed enough in science fiction novels, its a breath of fresh air. In the book Dana tries to change Rufus, her white slave owning relative by appealing to reason, and trying to allow him to see the evil in the ways of his time period. A man couldn't do that nearly as well or as clever as a woman.  

Race used as a social construckt. This book explores race thoroughly. The fact that she time travels back to the past shows a race paradigm that goes from the present (1970s) to the past (pre-Civil War) and goes into the present (today). 

"The lesson of Dana’s trips to the past, then, is that "we cannot escape or repress our racist history but instead must confront it and thereby reduce its power to pull us back, unthinkingly, to earlier modes of consciousness and interaction."  (wiki)    

Lastly, we have the meaning of the novel's title, Kindred. Kindred means a couple of things; it refers to the genealogical link between Dana and her ancestors but it also refers to the Universal link between all Americans regardless of ethnic background. Kinship of blacks and whites must be acknowledged if America is to become a better place for all.

Kindred is Butler's bestseller and its easy to see why. It oozes literary style (what a voice), emotional impact and drama, and keeps you on the edge of your seat for the two hundred and sixty page ride. As my first Octavia Butler book I was not disappointed, I look forward to reading more of her work soon. I'd also be interested in reading this again at a later date.

“‘Don’t argue with white folks,’ [Luke] had said. ‘Don’t tell them ‘no.’ Don’t let them see you mad. Just say ‘yes, sir.’ Then go ’head and do what you want to do. Might have to take a whippin’ for it later on, but if you want it bad enough, the whippin’ won’t matter much.”