a few thoughts...

I absolutely love this song at the moment and am listening to it non-stop:



It's the catchiest tune I’ve heard for a while and an phenomenal sample of Echo Beach

I also adore the new album from the Gossip, Music for Men. Beth Ditto once again fuses dancefloor pop-punk with a political message without coming over at all heavy-handed or preachy - a talent that no doubt made Standing In The Way of Control a favourite of the otherwise largely politically apathetic 'Skins generation'. The album's larger objective is to expose the privileged position that white, middle-class, straight men enjoy in our society (it goes deep kids, fight the power), but it is in the second single Love Long Distance and the phenomenal Vertical Rhythm that the Gossip's talents are best demonstrated. I always felt that Ditto's voice was the most distinctive of my generation and her soulful, strong-yet-world-weary vocals on both tracks allow the listener a level of empathy that is reminiscent of Dark Lines on the Standing in the Way of Control LP and as ever accompany the thumping beat perfectly to make it a thoroughly danceable tune if nothing else! Some have seen the Gossip as merely 'one-hit-wonder' but this follow up to their 2007 release (which is one of my favourite albums) surely discredits any such notion.

Along with Ditto, Lily Allen is holding the flag for the sisterhood with her latest single 22 and somewhat predictably I am rather taken by this little number too. Her vocals well reflect the sense of despair and injustice with which women yet to have bagged themselves a husband/long-term partner face when approaching 30; no longer considered prime-stock for the marriage market but also supposed to uphold a facade of strength in a society which with tells them they are to be iron-women of industry and independence whilst it worships still at the altar of the cult of motherhood and female domesticity. The lyrics are witty and well chosen, amongst a follow up album which hasn't as of yet grabbed me to the extent that Alright Still did.

Singles in my line of fire at the moment are Battlefield by Jordin Sparks and Soulja Boi’s Kiss me Thru the Phone. Sparks' comparison of love with war has to be the most contrived pop-music simile to date and frankly a little part of me dies when she suggests her boyfriend-come-nemesis should ‘go and get your armour’. What does that even mean? There’s more depth to your standard under 5s paddling pool than to this song, so I was very surprised to find it among this month’s Attitude magazine’s ‘Turn-Ons’, surely even the most stereotypically shallow of my brethren couldn’t actually enjoy this song, even on a level one might enjoy Britney etc. As for Soulja Boi’s Kiss me Thru the Phone here is a song that sounds like it was merely written so it could sell its own ringtone. I haven’t got anything against personalised ringtones, I don’t have one myself because I’m a bit of a miser, but at the risk of sounding middle-aged this merely appears to be a rather cynical commercial exercise, but then maybe it's a reflection of the extensive use of communication technology in our culture... no I’m not convinced either. I also take issue with the line ‘Baby I know that you like me, you my future wifey’. I sincerely hope that 'wifey' was only employed for reasons of poetic convenience; otherwise it is almost too offensive to countenance.

Something about being back at home politicises me, maybe it's the Daily Mail culture in my home time or maybe i have too much time on my hands left to thinking which turns me into a PC bore...


anyway kids that's all for now =)

Agnes Release Me

Absolutely LOVING this song at the moment, it was released last November apparently but I only recently heard it featured, as it was on a dance compilation, that I don't necessarily recommend. However this little gem is a ball of eurodance loveliness and has a bit of a 'Cher' feel to it (something I mean as a good thing - honest). It's set to become a dance classic I’m sure and would make an excellent summer #sigh# anthem (the term ‘anthem’ is SO overused I know). Anyway I recommend you take a listen as I can't get it out of my head!

Two La Roux posts in quick succession I know, but every time I listen to 'Quicksand', I keep hearing the lyircs to Prince's 'When Doves Cry' in my head alongside it, and just wondered if I was alone...?...

In anticipation of any potential 'La Roux vs Prince' remixes to emerge I of course reserve the rights to the creation of the idea... ;)

where the depth of your ignorance leaves you ashamed

Charlie Brooker's latest television offering comes in the form of the genius that is Newswipe. Exposing how ridiculous the news has become in his usual sarcastic manner the best bits of the first episode are when he demonstrates how we are shamed into keeping up with current events and how every insignificant event is now tied to the ‘credit crunch’. Here’s a taster but I fully recommend you download it on i-Player.

funny blog

she's mental

I kinda love her... ;)

http://french-graffiti.blogspot.com/

two hearts with accurate devotions

I saw La Roux a couple of weeks ago at our union’s indie night. They were one of the very few decent bands to play there (not many bands are prepared to play an event which costs £4 a ticket) and I thought they were absolutely amazing. I love Elly Jackson’s look, it’s quite androgynous and very reminiscent of Annie Lennox in her Eurhythmics days (before she took the weight of the world’s problems upon her own shoulders and became the female version of Bono). Recently I’ve become obsessed with ‘In for the Kill’ and particularly Annie Mac’s ‘mash-up edit -- as it’s called on YouTube. It’s essentially just a sped up version of the remix by Skream but I think its faster tempo helps to encapsulate the sense of urgency in the song. However, it’s definitely Jackson’s haunting voice that makes the song. It almost sounds like she sang it in a vacuum, physical impossibilities aside.

I have found watching Channel 4’s latest documentary series ‘Christianity: A History’ to be particularly interesting and thoughtful, presenting (although a rather simplistic) history of the impact of the rise and spread of Christianity throughout the world. However, I found the first episode at best faintly ridiculous and at worst somewhat insulting. Howard Jacobson’s premise seemed to be that Christianity was ashamed of its Jewish roots and had sewn anti-Semitism into its core beliefs and practices so as to shake off this connection. It essentially held the spread of Christianity responsible for the atrocities committed against Jewish people throughout history. Whilst everyone must acknowledge that much evil has been perpetrated against Jewish people in the name of Christ this is very different from holding the religion itself responsible for the murder of Jews over the centuries. He rightly noted that the development of the idea of the ‘blood libel’ was a despicable development of the Middle-Ages that created a doctrine which justified persecution, but essentially misunderstood why it emerged. Medieval anti-Semitism wasn’t about Jewishness or Judaism but about difference and all people who were marked out from society in one form or another (from heretics to lepers) became the victims of a society that struggled to create uniformity and that eliminate threats to this ideal. This is not to excuse attacks and pogroms against Jews, but to highlight that it was their difference rather than the specificity of their religion that made them a target. Jacobson throughout the program also seemed to suggest that Christians should continually refer to their religion through a Jewish paradigm, forgetting that whilst in many ways Jesus did not intend to create a new religion, His reforms were perhaps too extensive for those who believed in Him and His teachings to remain inside mainstream Judaism and that a new religion was indeed formed, with its own beliefs, practices and objectives. The idea that Christians should persistently refer back to Judaism in the practice of their own religion seems absurd to me, not least as it does not hold the same things to be important. Christianity is its own religion and differs radically from Judaism in many respects and so cannot refer to Judaism at every point. The fact that Jesus was Jewish and indeed that Christianity is in some measure a reformed Judaism is important and central to the religion as I understand it but doesn’t mean Christians must take heed of Judaism at every turn because it has developed its own priorities and its own faith. This does not mean that Christianity and Christians are ashamed of their Jewish roots, nor does it mean that the religion itself has adopted anti-Semitism so as to define itself. In that Christian education I did receive in a household of atheists with Presbyterian roots, I would argue that in many ways I was influenced much more by anti-Catholic ideas than anti-Jewish ones. Jesus’ own Judaism was important as were tenants and teachings such as the Ten Commandments and I was made aware of the Jewish legacy in Christianity, a legacy that was neither something of shame nor something that was hidden or underplayed. However, it remained a fact that it was where Jesus’ teachings departed from Judaism which marked one out as a Christian and defined the religion. I, and I doubt many Christians are or were, wasn’t brought up to understand my own religion as defined through hatred of Jews or Judaism. Thus to some extent Jacobson’s ideas were offensive to Christians, reducing their religion to mere Jew-hating. Its tone was also rather patronising towards Christianity making it appear as merely a flippant offshoot of Judaism that does not properly adhere to its tenants, rather than a complex and developed faith in its own right.