My blog More entries >
-
live long enough and you'll see yourself become the villain
Wednesday, Nov 18, 2009 5:53PM / Members only
About a week ago I watched Michael Jackson's This Is It. The MJ phenomenon is still going strong, five months after his death. In perhaps the best example of revisionist history I've seen in a while, everyone--from media to nonfans--are pretending like they've been admiring him always and weren't cracking jokes about his nose/behavior as recently as June 24th. let's face it--outside of the diehard fans, most were freaked out by his actions of the past decade (and half).I mean, the man has been widely accepted as a punchline for the past several years. But he passes away and suddenly--BAM. It's like everything from 1990 on had been erased from our memory. As if Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones came to our houses with the deneuralizer and flashed us with the red light.
Today, I read that Allen Iverson has been waived by the Grizzlies after a failed two game stint in which he threw another hissy fit about not getting enough playtime. For a player who has overcome so much (racism/prejudice/hate that put him behind bars during college, lack of size in a game dominated by bigs, the NBA's initial reluctance to market him because he was too street/hip hop) and has accomplished so much on the court (his 2001 finals run remain my single favorite non-Jordan non-Chuck basketball memory) he has now become a walking punchline. No team wants him. Labels such as "cancer" and "selfish" are being thrown at him. And probably rightfully so.
You know what these two seemingly unrelated stories remind me of?
Harvey Dent's line in The Dark Knight (the defining film of this freaking decade)
"Live long enough and you'll see yourself become the villain"
It's happened to Iverson. His epic career, one that has been full of Herculean feats (not strictly on-the-court achievements--after all he never did win it all--but rather all the things he has overcome), is going out with a whimper. He's not wanted by any team. His haters--whom he has fed Shut Up Juice on a daily basis for most of this decade--are now getting louder and louder. Even his diehard supporters, those who love him for his underdog traits, his heart, his keeping-it-real attitude, are shaking their heads.
"Why, AI, why?"
Bill Simmons wrote in his book that had Kurt Cobain lived, his legacy probably wouldn't be as strong as it is toady. Cobain would have had a public messy divorce, he probably would have made an ass of himself publicly (getting arrested on drug charges or whatever), and Nirvana would have eventually released some mediocre albums.
I agree with Simmons. Very few bands continue to release great album after great album (Radiohead and White Stripes are exceptions), it's not unfathomable that Nirvana would have released some crappy album in 99 when rock was at its lowest point in the late 90s (when New Found Glory, Creed, Linkin Park, Limp Bizkit and Blink 182 ruled and before The Strokes/White Stripes/The Vines/The Hives revived garage rock)
This goes back to Harvey Dent's line--live long enough and you will see yourself become the villain.
Let's use living and dying as a metaphor.
Iverson's career "lived" too long. We're now seeing the ugliness of his ego and the same "can't nobody tell me different" attitude that allowed him to overcome so much (seriously, the dude is 5'11 and 150 pounds and he's lasted 13 season in a sport ruled by giants, where 6'4 is considered short) is now ruining his reputation and making him a joke.
Had Iverson's career "died" a few years ago, say he suffers an abrupt career ending injury, we would have remembered him fondly and probably overrate him, like we always do to tragic figure who dies young.
Heath Ledger is being compared to the pantheon of actors (De Niro/Pacino/Brando), huh? Beacuse he gave a great performance (not greater than Jarvier Bardem as Anton Chigurh and died). Simmons already mentioned Cobain, so no need to rehash again.
The point is we tend to overrate and immortalize those who die young.
Imagine if De Niro died right after Raging Bull, we'd hail him as the undisputed greatest actor alive, no doubt. But instead, he lasted and we see him appear in trash like Righteous Kill (a movie so bad that I want to disown it from both De Niro/Pacino's filmography), Rocky and Bullwrinkle, and Hide and Seek.
"Sometimes dying is the best career move," writes Simmons.
It sounds like a joke, only it's not.
All them times that Iverson's been knocked down only to get up; all them injuries he played through. Ironically, if he had been wiped out by one of those injuries a few years back, we'd remember in better light than we do now.
-
serious?
Wednesday, Nov 18, 2009 11:39AM / Members only
bill simmons have been on this most of this year, me and my geek film snob friends have been (foolishly and prematurely) arguing about this since, like 2006, but two british publications (the times london and telegraph) recently released their best films of the decade list...and both lists manage to leave out the dark knight, eternal sunshine, no country for old men or wall-e in the top ten...but put stuff like borat, casino royale and slumdog in the top ten.
the telegraph was especially ridiculous, putting Saw (yes the crappy torture porn horror flick) at #14... a full thirty spots above TDK.
the lesson? even though the brits are clearly the best when it comes to rock music--they suck at films.
leave that to the americans. -
carry that weight
Monday, Nov 16, 2009 10:47AM / Members only
So people been asking me "what's with this recent Beatles kick?"
I'm like "what? since when do you need a reason to listen to the greatest band of all time, one that has put out more iconic tunes than any other musician alive?"
Okay so I'm being a music snob. The truth is, I am on a Beatles kick because of a combination of things. I already mentioned some of them on here--I cleaned my ears with this Japanese earwax remover, regained my superhuman/God of Gambler-level hearing, fixed the speakers in my room and listened to Abbey Road remastered. That scenario I just described is probably equivalent to a blind man regaining his vision and seeing Scarlett Johansson naked.
That's one reason. The other reason is I read this amazingly well-written feature on the Beatles in Rolling Stone a few weeks ago. Yeah, yeah "what more is there to be written about them?" you say. Well, first of all, Mikal Gilmore, who wrote this piece, knows how to tell a story. The piece focus on the tension during the final days of the band: Lennon/McCartney were bickering like two pmsing girls, Yoko Ono was a super pretentious bitch snob who always spoke on behalf of Lennon (and Lennon's whipped ass let it happen.. or actually, he let it be). Harrison felt underappreciated (and rightfully so) and walked out on the band at one point--prompting Lennon to suggest Eric Clapton as his replacement.
Clapton on the Beatles? That's like a Marvel What If? were for the ages.
Then you got Ringo doing nothing and proving that Miss Chin is right and Summer don't know what the hell she talking about--he is the worst Beatle.
The Lennon/McCartney partnership is such a typical "two geniuses growing too big for each other" corollary. This theory was proven some three decades later when Kobe and Shaq broke up.
Kobe/Shaq parallel Lennon/McCartney so much its eerie. In terms of level of brilliance in their respective fields--it's about right. Shaq is the most dominant player ever and Kobe's a top ten greatest of all time. Together, they made beautiful music on the Lakers. Alone, they shined at times, faltered at times, but in the end, people will remember Kobe/Shaq's alley oop in game 7 against Portland.
And for any aspiring feature writer, this piece is a good read. 7 pages, piled with words but it's an easy read.
-
back in the ussr
Monday, Nov 16, 2009 2:01AM / Members only
what a sad fucking day, even america has to cater to the big six communists
money talks in the end, i guess.
fucking eh im tired. im annoyed. im running on empty (like the river phoenix movie). if the weather doesnt suck ass itd be a perfect night for a walk to kennedy town.
instead, i read this while listening to beatles "revolution"China’s Role as Lender Alters Dynamics for Obama’s Visit By HELENE COOPER, MICHAEL WINES and DAVID E. SANGERWhen President Obama visits China for the first time on Sunday, he will, in many ways, be assuming the role of profligate spender coming to pay his respects to his banker.
That stark fact — China is the largest foreign lender to the United States — has changed the core of the relationship between the United States and the only country with a reasonable chance of challenging its status as the world’s sole superpower.
The result: unlike his immediate predecessors, who publicly pushed and prodded China to follow the Western model and become more open politically and economically, Mr. Obama will be spending less time exhorting Beijing and more time reassuring it.
In a July meeting, Chinese officials asked their American counterparts detailed questions about the health care legislation making its way through Congress. The president’s budget director, Peter R. Orszag, answered most of their questions. But the Chinese were not particularly interested in the public option or universal care for all Americans.
“They wanted to know, in painstaking detail, how the health care plan would affect the deficit,” one participant in the conversation recalled. Chinese officials expect that they will help finance whatever Congress and the White House settle on, mostly through buying Treasury debt, and like any banker, they wanted evidence that the United States had a plan to pay them back.
It is a long way from the days when President George W. Bush hectored China about currency manipulation, or when President Bill Clinton exhorted the Chinese to improve human rights.
Mr. Obama has struck a mollifying note with China. He pointedly singled out the emerging dynamic at play between the United States and China during a wide-ranging speech in Tokyo on Saturday that was meant to outline a new American relationship with Asia.
“The United States does not seek to contain China,” Mr. Obama said. “On the contrary, the rise of a strong, prosperous China can be a source of strength for the community of nations.”
He alluded to human rights but did not get specific. “We will not agree on every issue,” he said, “and the United States will never waver in speaking up for the fundamental values that we hold dear — and that includes respect for the religion and cultures of all people.”
White House officials have been working for months to make sure that Mr. Obama’s three-day visit to Shanghai and Beijing conveys a conciliatory image. For instance, in June, the White House told the Dalai Lama that while Mr. Obama would meet him at some point, he would not do so in October, when the Tibetan spiritual leader visited Washington, because it was too close to Mr. Obama’s visit to China.
Greeting the Dalai Lama, whom China condemns as a separatist, weeks before Mr. Obama’s first presidential trip to the country could alienate Beijing, administration officials said. Every president since George H. W. Bush in 1991 has met the Dalai Lama when he visited Washington, usually in private encounters at the White House, although in 2007 George W. Bush became the first president to welcome him publicly, bestowing the Congressional Gold Medal on him at the Capitol. Mr. Obama met the Dalai Lama as a senator.
Similarly, while he was campaigning for the presidency, Mr. Obama several times accused China of manipulating its currency, an allegation that the current Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, repeated during his confirmation hearings. But in April, the Treasury Department retreated from that criticism, issuing a report that said China was not manipulating its currency to increase its exports.
While American officials said privately that they remained frustrated that China’s currency policies lowered the cost of Chinese goods and made American products more expensive in foreign markets, they said that they were relieved that China was fighting the global recession with an enormous fiscal stimulus program to spur domestic growth, and added that now was not the time to antagonize Beijing.
China is not viewed as a trouble spot for the United States. But this administration, like its predecessor, has had difficulty grappling with a rising power that seems eager to avoid direct clashes with the United States but affects its interests in many areas, including currency policy, nuclear proliferation, climate change and military spending.
In that regard, two members of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy team said that the United States’ interactions with the Chinese had been far too narrow in past years, focusing on counterterrorism and North Korea. Too little was done, they said, to address China’s energy and environmental policies, or its expansion of influence in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Africa, where China has invested heavily and used billions of dollars in aid to advance its political influence.
One hint of the Obama administration’s new approach came in a speech this fall by James B. Steinberg, the deputy secretary of state, who has deep roots in China policy. He argued that China needed to adopt a policy of “strategic reassurance” to the rest of the world, a phrase that appeared intended to be the successor to the framework of the Bush era, when China was urged to embrace a role as a “responsible stakeholder.”
“Strategic reassurance rests on a core, if tacit, bargain,” Mr. Steinberg said. “Just as we and our allies must make clear that we are prepared to welcome China’s ‘arrival,’ ” he argued, the Chinese “must reassure the rest of the world that its development and growing global role will not come at the expense of security and well-being of others.”
The Chinese reaction has been mixed, at best. The official China Daily newspaper ran a column just before Mr. Obama’s arrival suggesting that the United States needed to provide some assurance of its own — to “respect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” code words for entirely backing away from the issues of how China deals with Taiwan and Tibet.
In the United States, the phrase “strategic reassurance” has been attacked by conservative commentators, who argue that any reassurance that the United States provides to China would be an acknowledgment of a decline in American power.
In an op-ed article in The Washington Post, the analysts Robert Kagan and Dan Blumenthal argued that the policy had echoes of Europe “ceding the Western Hemisphere to American hegemony” a century ago. “Lingering behind this concept is an assumption of America’s inevitable decline,” they wrote. White House officials shot back, insisting that it is China that needs to do the reassurance, not the United States.
In China, Mr. Obama will meet with local political leaders and will host an American-style town hall meeting with students in Shanghai. He will then spend two days in Beijing meeting with President Hu Jintao.
It seems unlikely that Mr. Obama will get the same celebrity-type reception in Beijing that he received in Cairo, Ghana, Paris and London. China seems mostly immune to the Obama fever that swept other parts of the world, and the Chinese are growing more confident that their country has the wherewithal to compete with the United States on the world stage, analysts say.
“Obama is still a positive guy, and all over the world most people think he’s more energetic, more sincere, than Bush, more a reformist,” said Shi Yinhong, a professor and an expert on United States-China relations at People’s University in Beijing. “But in China, Obama’s popularity is less than in Europe, than Japan or Southeast Asia.” In China, he said, “there is no worship of Obama.”
For instance, during the Bush and Clinton years, China might release a few political dissidents on the eve of a visit by the president as a good-will gesture. This time, American officials say, they do not expect any similar gestures, although they say that Mr. Obama will raise human rights issues privately with Mr. Hu.
“This time China will agree to have a human rights dialogue with the U.S. on some cases,” Mr. Shi said, but “the arguments have changed compared to the past. Now we say, ‘We are a different country, we have our own system, our own culture.’ ”
Helene Cooper reported from Singapore, Michael Wines from Beijing, and David E. Sanger from Washington.
-
im not there
Sunday, Nov 15, 2009 11:36PM / Members only
- More entries >
My guestbook More comments >
-
-
-
John Prymmerposted on Monday, Sep 7, 2009 11:55AM [Report]Hey Ben, thanks for the cool review of our shown a couple weeks ago. Hope you'll stop by The Wanch to catch more shows. Next time pls introduce yourself to us.. Keep on rocking John & Don't Panic. -
MissScarlettposted on Friday, Sep 4, 2009 6:02AM [Report]THought I'd swing by and make sure you aren't dead in a ditch or anything. I get paranoid when people deviate from their usual routines ;) -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Gong Wu posted on Monday, Aug 10, 2009 10:39AM [Report]Hostile possibly, but that's what's great about opinions. You should be entitled to them.
I've always been a champion of musicians like AXL Rose and MJ. Not only because I love their music, but simply because they are reknowned as being a complete ASSHOLES or FREAKS! It gives me great pleasure when I hear people criticise them personally. Because normally I will say. Not matter what AXL is like as a person, His Music makes up for any flaw. Same thing for Michael Jackson. I love both of them because the fact is, no matter how weird or horrible they are. They have an amazing talent that they share with the world and are entitled to be assholes or weird. Whatever, music has always been first for me.
AnD get a lot of flack around here for having favouritism for 24herbs. I was hearing a lot of negativity about them and felt like because I know the guys on a personal level and a lot of guys don't, I should try and defend both parties somewhat in case there was some kind of underground scandal! I personally, have no passion for Hip Hop, just like my favourite girls are chinese. But nonetheless I can register the fact these guys work hard and have reason for being here. not all musically related!
I hated hearing people moaning about the comp being fixed. Some people read my words and didn't translate them too well. I never said that. I only ever said it was a flawed comp and not just this one, music comps in general are always subjective anyways.
As for fanning 500+ people. I never liked the idea of picking and choosing my friends (because trust me in HK when you're totally in the artist scene you have a lot) and tonnes of these guys I know through clubbing or working. So why not just fucking add them all and save the trouble when people secretly get upset that your friends but you aint a "fan"
I don't like the "friends and fan" seperation but I guess after being on this website for almost 2 years it kinda gets muddled up after a while. Go look at our facebook and you will see my "top friends list" comprises of my band and my band only, for fear of offending good friends who would be upset if I didn't have enough space on there for them.
Anyway judgeing from the tone on our blog I'm presuming this might be a wasted defence of myself but I hope you understand my logic, and if not, hate me as a person. but respect the fact we make music that people do love.
cheers for coming over and taking the time to comment bro.
Li -
Gong Wu posted on Monday, Aug 10, 2009 10:38AM [Report]Hostile possibly, but that's what's great about opinions. Everyone should be entitled to them.
I've always been a champion of musicians like AXL Rose and MJ. Not only because I love their music, but simply because they are reknowned as being a complete ASSHOLES or FREAKS! It gives me great pleasure when I hear people criticise them personally. Because normally I will say. Not matter what AXL is like as a person, His Music makes up for any flaw. Same thing for Michael Jackson. I love both of them because the fact is, no matter how weird or horrible they are. They have an amazing talent that they share with the world and are entitled to be assholes or weird. Whatever, music has always been first for me.
AnD get a lot of flack around here for having favouritism for 24herbs. I was hearing a lot of negativity about them and felt like because I know the guys on a personal level and a lot of guys don't, I should try and defend both parties somewhat in case there was some kind of underground scandal! I personally, have no passion for Hip Hop, just like my favourite girls are chinese. But nonetheless I can register the fact these guys work hard and have reason for being here. not all musically related!
I hated hearing people moaning about the comp being fixed. Some people read my words and didn't translate them too well. I never said that. I only ever said it was a flawed comp and not just this one, music comps in general are always subjective anyways.
As for fanning 500+ people. I never liked the idea of picking and choosing my friends (because trust me in HK when you're totally in the artist scene you have a lot) and tonnes of these guys I know through clubbing or working. So why not just fucking add them all and save the trouble when people secretly get upset that your friends but you aint a "fan"
I don't like the "friends and fan" seperation but I guess after being on this website for almost 2 years it kinda gets muddled up after a while. Go look at our facebook and you will see my "top friends list" comprises of my band and my band only, for fear of offending good friends who would be upset if I didn't have enough space on there for them.
Anyway judgeing from the tone on our blog I'm presuming this might be a wasted defence of myself but I hope you understand my logic, and if not, hate me as a person. but respect the fact we make music that people do love.
cheers for coming over and taking the time to comment bro.
Li -
Gong Wu posted on Monday, Aug 10, 2009 10:38AM [Report]Hostile possibly, but that's what's great about opinions. Everyone should be entitled to them.
I've always been a champion of musicians like AXL Rose and MJ. Not only because I love their music, but simply because they are reknowned as being a complete ASSHOLES or FREAKS! It gives me great pleasure when I hear people criticise them personally. Because normally I will say. Not matter what AXL is like as a person, His Music makes up for any flaw. Same thing for Michael Jackson. I love both of them because the fact is, no matter how weird or horrible they are. They have an amazing talent that they share with the world and are entitled to be assholes or weird. Whatever, music has always been first for me.
AnD get a lot of flack around here for having favouritism for 24herbs. I was hearing a lot of negativity about them and felt like because I know the guys on a personal level and a lot of guys don't, I should try and defend both parties somewhat in case there was some kind of underground scandal! I personally, have no passion for Hip Hop, just like my favourite girls are chinese. But nonetheless I can register the fact these guys work hard and have reason for being here. not all musically related!
I hated hearing people moaning about the comp being fixed. Some people read my words and didn't translate them too well. I never said that. I only ever said it was a flawed comp and not just this one, music comps in general are always subjective anyways.
As for fanning 500+ people. I never liked the idea of picking and choosing my friends (because trust me in HK when you're totally in the artist scene you have a lot) and tonnes of these guys I know through clubbing or working. So why not just fucking add them all and save the trouble when people secretly get upset that your friends but you aint a "fan"
I don't like the "friends and fan" seperation but I guess after being on this website for almost 2 years it kinda gets muddled up after a while. Go look at our facebook and you will see my "top friends list" comprises of my band and my band only, for fear of offending good friends who would be upset if I didn't have enough space on there for them.
Anyway judgeing from the tone on our blog I'm presuming this might be a wasted defence of myself but I hope you understand my logic, and if not, hate me as a person. but respect the fact we make music that people do love.
cheers for coming over and taking the time to comment bro.
Li -
-
-
-
Martin Wongposted on Wednesday, Jul 22, 2009 3:28AM [Report]Cool. Next time you're in L.A., hit me up for cookies or something. -
-
Alfred Hsingposted on Wednesday, Jul 15, 2009 9:36AM [Report]Eric sin from the bay area in cali? If we are talkin about the same person, yeah he is my boy! whats up? hows it goin? - More comments >
Ben Sin's Music
Stats
- In West Philly, born and raised. On the playgound's where I spent most of my days. Chilling out maxing relaxing all cool and all shooting some bball outside the......In West Philly, born and raised. On the playgound's where I spent most of my days. Chilling out maxing relaxing all cool and all shooting some bball outside the...
Nah, just kidding.
I'm like this half local half ABC dude. I've lived exactly half my life in LA and the half in HK. I'm not really like them westernized ABCs that hang around LKF everynight, but then I'm not really that local cause my Cantonese cussing is not up to par and I don't carry a freaking man-purse (that's the HK style, man. Not hating... just saying.) I'm stuck in the middle.
I used to write for BC and Beats Magazine. I did mainly movie reviews and the occasional feature here and there. Now I'm freelancing (aka unemployed). Yeah. Still writing though.
I love basketball. movies. music. food. poker. In that order.
- Occupation: Magazine Editor
- Gender: Male
- Total visits: 20,407
