john mayer is the antichrist and his music is the c drone of a depressed mother's piano.

I saw the movie antichrist with willem defoe and charlotte gainsburg.
I told you what happened in the movie.
I sent a link to the trailer.
afterwards, you said, “I don’t like that. that is fucked.”
you used to like fucked things.
a long time ago, you played me the song if winter ends on the phone. it was fucked.
then a while later, you asked me, “do you like john mayer?”
I said, he is on twitter.
I said john mayer is a douche bag.
you asked me if I ever read war and peace.
you wrote your senior thesis on tolstoy.
I said no ive never read war and peace
I said I am reading self help by lorrie moore. the mother is depressed when the father is around. the dad hates the way the mom sings so he tells her to straighten her back and sing with her rib cage more. the mom sits on the piano bench all day long and plays a c drone on the piano. the mom loves singing. when the dad is not around, the mom sings.
I said, the mom is me. you are the dad.
you said that means you are charlotte gainsburg and I am willem defoe.
I said john mayer is the antichrist and his music is a c drone from a piano of a depressed mother.
you said, you are war. I am peace.
I said, I don’t know what that means.
I said I don’t know what anything means.
you said, it is sad that we can only compare things to other things and have no original thoughts.
I said, I am sure you read that somewhere.
you said you did.

A Don Delillo novel reviewed by Lorrie Moore. When I saw this, I nearly 'creamed my jeans'.

Basically, Moore says Mao II isn't Delillo's best (See: White Noise and Libra). Mao II is, however an "exploration of the relationship between writers and terrorists". Delillo argues, through characters like Karen--who is equally fascinated with reclusive writer Bill Gray as she is with reports of acts of terror (and who was also once some kind of cult)--that terrorists and novelists, in particular, occupy the same cultural space. However, where the novelist has failed, the terrorist has succeeded, effectively and symbolically taking the writer hostage. Furthermore, Moore argues that Delillo's inspiration for this sort of "writer taken hostage" scenario was Salman Rushdie.

From reading Mao II, I have formulated a sort of double faceted theory on Delillo's success. The two reasons Delillo is successful are:

1. His 'mystic American object-to-subject exploration'.
Delillo has this way of speaking to the reader. He will take an object, and explore it with descriptive language until the object takes on a mystic presence in both the character and the reader's cultural consciousness. Buildings, baseballs, pills, typewriters, etc etc...move through the thought process in autistically obsessive ways until one is convinced of the object's cultural weight.

2. Delillo is unafraid to talk about anything. He writes about everything, as Moore has mentioned in her review of Mao II. He is unafraid of taking on crazy perspectives. Child math prodigies, rock stars, terrorists, hostages, 9/11 terrorists, graffiti artists, people in one of the twin towers during 9/11, someone seeing people in Russia with Nuclear deformations, etc...

All in all, Moore made the poignant remark that Delillo's writing is, unlike her own, somewhat void of emotional weight, however, it is the cultural exploration that sort of causes the reader to drift through his novels with such attachment.

Don Delillo

does anyone else pick up some weird speech patterns in this? Sort of like Delillo has a speech impediment

revolutionary nerd steroids article

Just read this article. Also read this book called No Logo. In loo of reading No Logo (and HRO), this article seems like it is trying to reflect a personal brand on the author. Kind of like the person writing the article doesn't actually believe in "nerd steroids" on a moral level, like Nancy Reagan or Jesus. Feel like this person is trying to keep their writing accessible to teenagers who are "on the fence" with using "nerd steroids" and need a push towards the "nerd steroids will make you schizo/bipolar" argument. feel like this is either very creative shitty nonfiction (the author probs had way more problems) or shitty fiction.

"Although Adderall is supposed to take around half an hour to take full effect, it seemed like almost instantly I had abandoned the pile of books on my desk and was plucking the strings of my Chinese instrument, realizing that music was the only really wonderful thing, and that all the essay crap I had cared so much about was a waste of time...I decided to drop out of school. It made me feel so relieved. I looked forward to travelling, reading books I love, and obtaining a real education free of stress, useless evaluations, and exhausting all-nighters stuck at my desk."

"6: 25 am
Grouping words into categories. This is better than sex."

"I am planning to work on dealing with my stress in healthy ways, rather than look for a job to support my drug dependency. I figure that if I do not learn how to cope with pressure I will burn out eventually."

from these quotes, it seems like the author is:
A. not street smart
B. book smart
C. probs a budding communist

I am glad i read this article. The site the article is from looks friendly to an alternative audience but still relevant from a pop culture stand point. Out of Baltimore. never been there. They have posted a story called " The Gentle Seduction " by Mark Stiegler. It was the second thing i clicked on after "music" where i saw desaparacidos and cass mccombs recommended by the staff. the gentle seduction begins with the line,
"He worked with computers; she worked with trees, and the flowers that took hold on the sides of the Mountain."
i am excited to read it. it was published in 1989.

Couple Things

Made a new song. Think it might be my "best mash-up yet".

Also, does anyone ever wonder what people write when it says, "{yourscreenname} is typing..." in gmail chat?

i feel their head might explode in this period of time.