The Flaming Lips

In two weeks, I will have the pleasure of reviewing Street Scene for the LA Times Sunday Magazine. To perhaps get my writing up to snuff, I'm going to attempt to review the Flaming Lips show from the other night.

In short, The Flaming Lips put on one hell of a show. The stage featured a see-through half-circle screen, which the Lips played videos on throughout the show, and also used to feature Wayne (the lead singer) talking to the crowd throughout the set. They had a camera fixed on to his mic, which allowed those of us standing in back to see clearly the whole time. The screen, combined with about 50 large balloons, a stage filled with people dressed as sheep, and one human sized panda and gorilla, made the Lips set as visually stunning as it was well played.

The one thing that bothers me most about concerts is when the band is disconnected from the audience, too cool to connect to the people who are there to see them, and too good to play the popular songs. The Flaming Lips incorporated all of their hits throughout the set list, and made a point of talking to the audience throughout the show, encouraging us to sing along, and expressing their preferences for a cheap show, like the $6 one they were performing. They joked about leaving briefly to let us cheer for an encore, which while not new, is still cool.

Overall, the Flaming Lips put on a show to inspire both eyes and ears. The visually stunning performance tied in beautifully with the tight sound they put out, giving their live cuts a feel different from that of the album, but equally as good. The Flaming Lips have well earned their reputation as one of the best live bands around.

Per usual, thanks for reading.

Dis

Keep the Change

It is time for the United States to catch up with the rest of the world. I'm talking about money, here, people. The US has been far behind both Britain and the European Union in two particular things money related. Yes, it's time to embrace both dollar coins and the two dollar denomination.

The dollar coin has been valid currency for a long time, but has long been dismissed by the general pubic. From the Susan B. Anthony to the Sacagawea, and now the George Washington, the one dollar coin has never caught on. In Britain, the Pound only comes in coins for the one and two pound denominations. My time in London taught me what that small pocket in my jeans was for- the change pocket became quite useful, and it was nice to not have to dig in to my wallet to buy something small. Coins are cheaper to make and last longer than bills, but that has been discussed by people smarter than me.

So, what will it take for America to embrace coinage as a popular form of currency? My initial thought is that we need it named after someone everyone knows and likes. Susan B. Anthony isn't going to cut it; most people don't know why she is historically important. While more people could say why Sacagawea is famous, she still doesn't carry that general fame and unquestioned love from the general public. But, not many figures are greater than George Washington. Despite a failed marketing campaign and the fact that they're still unsuccessfully out there, I think it's time for something new.

I offer two propositions: One, have a series of the all the presidents, much like the state quarters. Release them over time, and limit them to length of term served. The FDR dollar? Maybe less popular, because it's got 4 terms (well, 3.5) worth of coins out there. Find yourself a William Henry Harrison (30 days in office), and that's a keeper. My other thought is to release the JFK dollar. I feel like no one really hated JFK; he's a figure big enough to make this work.

What about the coin itself? What would distinguish it from a quarter? I say we take guidance from the Pound, and make it thicker, to distinguish it. Also, get rid of that fake gold sheen. Make it look like a coin, not like a something you'd find in a treasure chest.

We should also embrace the two dollar denomination. Inflation has reduced the purchasing power of the dollar, and realistically, most single items cost more than a buck. The two dollar bill (or coin) would prove more useful, as users could carry less currency, worth more. I realize that $2 bills are considered oddities, but why not use them more? It's more practical to carry more value in less physical capacity; it's quite literally more bang for the buck.

To summarize: make coin money that works, and catches on, and make the $2 denomination more prevalent.

Per usual, thanks for reading.

Dis

Keeping it Classy

Recently, there have been a variety of weddings- it is wedding season, after all (better than Christmas!). I had a thought, as I feel like invitations are single-handedly supporting the post office these days.

While weddings remain stalwarts of tradition and class, it may be time to make a break from tradition in wedding invitations. Sure, the fancy invites are nice to get in the mail- they're pretty, they become a mainstay of the side of my refrigerator, and they ooze class. And, because I am sure many brides, mothers of brides, and Ms. Manners would be appalled if I suggested the abolition of the wedding invitation in favor of something electronic, I instead propose the following. Pun intended.

So invitations stay. But, what if we made responses electronic? Wouldn't it be significantly easier if there were an online database that people could go to log their RSVPs? Fathers of the Bride would save not only on the postage required to send back those little RSVP cards, but on the cards themselves (and corresponding envelopes). An online RSVP system would be easy, and as an added feature, could incorporate wedding management for guests. Imagine it: guests could click a radio button for their response, and in addition, enter their meal preferences online, providing an easy to manage dinner list. The database could provide easy guest lists, and could probably also provide an easy to use online seating chart as the couple (or couples' parents) decided whom to seat with whom.

Since I am far from all-knowing about weddings, I would submit that there are probably other aspects of wedding planning that could be done online. Parents of the couple located in different places could both access it, should that be something that was useful.

For all I know, this could exist. If it doesn't, well, I want royalties if someone makes it. It would buck the convention of tradition, but I imagine that it would be easier and cheaper than the RSVP cards, and something easy to build. In a time when saving money is en vogue, it would be easier to make the break from tradition, without really losing any of that special wedding class.

Per usual, thanks for reading.

Dis

Editor's note: My friend Aaron created exactly what I was talking about, using Google forms. See http://snipurl.com/nrknm.

One Tangent after another...

• Got a phone call today (three, actually) from a friend I hadn't spoken to in a really long time. She's one of those ones that it really doesn't matter how long it's been, things just click again. Call that person.
• Take a moment to realize how lucky you may be. You have internet- your standard of living is probably pretty good.
• In the spirit of my friend's new blog, to be listed shortly in the recommended section on the right, listen to Manchester Orchestra's album "Everything to Nothing." It's quite good, and has something for everyone.
• Wireless internet still continues to amaze me. I can share thoughts with the world (well, all 11 of you) and sit at my kitchen table drinking tea.
• As an afterthought to the piece below, about death- take the time to hear your grandparents' stories. I haven't enough.
• Fun tidbit: The weird letters you have to retype when signing up for any online account help the new york times digitize their old articles. One word matches to make sure you're correct, and the other fills in the gaps that the optical readers can't do. Technology is cool.

And, per usual, thanks for reading.

Dis

Death (or glory)

No apologies about not writing for a while. I had nothing to say.

My best friend's grandmother died a few days ago, and tonight I went over there to sit Shiva with them. She lived a full and wonderful life, and her passing was expected, and even somewhat welcomed. The family spoke of the good memories they had, and it was a celebration of her life.

The part that puzzled me was everyone else in attendance- mostly people I knew, and all happy to see each other, but with a somber overtone. That sort of mood is to be expected, and it's not as if anyone made any faux pas. But if the family could have a more positive outlook on the whole thing, shouldn't the friends in attendance share that feeling?

I once joked to my friend Eric that if something were to happen to me in college, I didn't want any of those serious pictures shown, but instead wanted a picture of me mooning someone plastered all over any service. I feel like that would give a more appropriate tone. If I pass, and it calls for all my family and friends to be in one place, then I want them to be celebrating, and having a good time. I feel like most people feel the same way; that they would want their loved ones having a good time, and enjoying being together. Let it be a party.

Per usual, TFR.

Dis

Irony.

Started work today at the court house. Got jury duty in the mail when I got home.

Politics and Law

Oh, hey. Good to see you, it's been a while.

I was in a doctor's office today, and they had Fox News blaring, reporting on the Sonia Sotomayor nomination. Yes, it is slanted to the right. We all know that. I don't particularly care about that- my bone to pick here is about the confusion between law and policy.

Sotomayor said, to law students (from a clip being shown) that the Court of Appeals is where policy is made. She then followed up that statement saying she knows she shouldn't say that, and that judges are not legislators. The commentators then kept harping on the judicial role, so on and so forth. 

The thing is, the CoA is where policy happens. They generally decide cases based on what the will of the people would be. But it is different from law- law comes from the legislator, and policy comes from the interpritation of that law. They are without a doubt connected, but they are not the same.

Point being, this one needs to be let go. One Justice out of nine cannot create policy on the Court, and the Court is far too scrutinized to go rouge and legislate- it is outside of their Constitutional bounds.

Per usual, thanks for reading.

Dis