raising heller

recently, i had a post about a band i like, death cab for cutie. well, a friend of mine, neil, had something to say about it. over the course of 3 days we emailed each other back forth about the subject of music, ‘the man’, and pop culture in general. for your enjoyment, i’m posting all of those emails in their entirety. it’s a pretty interesting read. long, but interesting…

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 11:54 AM

ok, my snobby opinion about death cab. they’re ok. and just ok. that first song is too dang folky for my tastes. and the second is alright. it’s not because of lack of exposure. every alterna-teenie that works at urban outffiters has a death cab shirt on. you wanna hear great indie rock, check out the new dressy bessy. click on the link and listen to NPR’s review: coldplay vs. dressy bessy.

http://www.dressybessy.com/

{STEVEN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 12:33 PM

awesome. i’m glad you’re weighing in on this.

believe me, i appreciate your opinion. but i totally disagree with you. i most definitely realize that death cab has a wide following. i’ve seen the shirts, the posters on some sad kids wall in a lame t.v. show, etc…, but about 40 years ago, how many people were wearing beatles shirts? now, i’m not comparing death cab with the beatles (or am i?) but i do think that i would much rather listen to any death cab album (at this point in my life) than any beatles album.

dressy bessy is good, though i honestly haven’t listened to them that much. i listened to the coldplay vs. dressy bessy thing, but i don’t think i get the contrast/comparison. they’re two totally different bands. to call dressy bessy “a far more efficient pleasure machine than coldplay” (as the NPR guy did) isn’t really being fair. is it just because they’re upbeat? by that rationale, i would call coldplay a far more efficient pleasure machine than sigur ros. but i still love sigur ros. and to be honest, i’ll take the muffs over any of them.

the beauty of opinions.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 1:15 PM

comparing the beatles to death cab? or the beatles to anyone. you’d rather listen to death cab than beatles? years from now, heck, ONE year from now, i’d wager you won’t have the same opinion. and in probably ten years time (or less), no one will remember death cab. even the biggest fans probably will have to dig deep into their memory to remember them. they don’t have any staying power. i mean i’d rather listen to my new stuff over the beatles too i guess. just because i’ve heard all the beatles stuff so much and i’m always looking for new stuff. i don’t know, either bands/music hits me as genuine or they just don’t. like that ditty bops, great stuff there. i can’t explain it very well. either it sounds pure or it sounds mucked up with today’s trends. or some other agenda other than just makin’ a good record. it’s a gut feeling sort of thing.

i do enjoy all opinions on music. especially yours.

and as far as your business cards go, [editors note: this is a response to my plea for opinions on mmy new business card] dude, don’t change a friggin’ thing!! it’s awesome!!! it’s great!! i wouldn’t alter it at all. if i ever have a business, i’ll probably want that picture on MY business cards.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 1:36 PM

oh i forgot to mention that i’m not too cool for trendy stuff. i mean it doesn’t get any more mainstream than the beatles. i liked those weezer songs you had on your site. even though i don’t like that rivers guy. but that’s a whole other topic. and the NPR thing was a ‘for your information’ type of thing. sort of a ‘chalk one up for the underdogs.’

{STEVEN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:05 PM

yeah, i can’t stand rivers either, but weezer seems to be pulling it together a bit. chalk one up for the underdogs, i’m down with that.

{STEVEN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:31 PM

i reiterate, i’m not trying to compare death cab with the beatles, i’m just saying…

as far as longevity goes, i’m not sure what makes you think death cab will fade out that fast. granted, i don’t think they’re going to have the staying power of the beatles or (unfortunately) the eagles, but they have been around for quite a while. longer than dressy bessy, maybe not by much, but a little bit. i really don’t think they’ll be forgotten that quickly. they may run in a different musical circle from you, but the impact they’ve had in that circle has been significant. this may be a bit of an extreme comparison (and don’t get offended), but i’d bet a sinatra fan would have put money that when nevermind came out that that kurt cobain kid wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans. now that is a comparison that i’m willing to make. in much the same way that nirvana brought the underground to the forefront, i would say that death cab has done the same with some of the indie music of our day. they’re definitely not the only ones, but i would say they’re big contributors.

this is fun!

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 3:55 PM

ok sinatra fans may have said that. if they even ever heard ‘nevermind’. but death cab brings indie music to the forefront? what? nah… i think it’s only indie in the fact that they are on a smaller label than some of the other popular bands. but once something gets enough exposure and becomes popular with enough of the kids that all of them have heard of it, it no longer is indie.

this IS fun!

{STEVEN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 4:16 PM

yeah, i guess one could make that argument. but that’s the same thing people said about nirvana. they were punk, but they signed with geffen. would you still consider them punk? (what kind of labels were “alternative” and “grunge” anyway?) so, are we going to let exposure dictate our music? it’s not death cab’s fault that people listen to their music. besides, isn’t that the goal of most bands, indie or not? granted, indie used to mean independant, but i think we’ve gotten away from that a bit. it’s come to denote (at least in my mind) a certain type of music. i would still consider the white stripes an indie band even though they’re on a major label and definitely have more than their fair share of exposure. if you think i’m wrong, what would your definition of “indie” be? there are a lot of small, independant bands out there who wouldn’t possibly fit into the category of “indie”, i.e. just about every new wave ska band that ever existed. what makes dressy bessy indie?

your turn. : )

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 5:02 PM

there are different types of indie. there’s indie pop, indie rock and so forth. i don’t think nirvana was ever punk, in my mind. the ramones are punk. i don’t think we should dictate our music to exposure. but at the same time i don’t want to be a ‘jump on the bandwagon’ type of kid who’s trying to be cool, because they listen to a band with a weird name like death cab. look how indie i am, i like a band called death cab for cutie. i am NOT talking about you. i know you really do like them. i mean the urban outfitters people and the 45 year olds who decide what posters go on the wall for tv shows. doesn’t it irk you that you liked something long before the rest of the kids decided to jump on the cool train? i mean, dressy bessy was on Conan last week and they were on Carson daily a few years back, but wanting them to be real popular is the worst thing i could wish upon them. i believe that exposure effects the type and quality of most bands. there’s pressure from labels to make it a hit so they go more mainstream or whatever. plus i think most bands that get the exposure that death cab is getting, just don’t deserve it. but the bands that i think do deserve it, i wouldn’t want them to get there cause it would probably ruin them. so it’s a paradox.

king me.

{STEVEN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 6:04 PM

“look how indie i am, i like a band called death cab for cutie.” when i read that, i could totally picture you saying it. that cracked me up.

i can appreciate your desire in not wanting to “jump on the bandwagon”, but isn’t good music simply good music regardless of label or exposure? there are definitely those who listen to a band like death cab for pukie [editors note: neil had called them ‘death cab for pukie’ in the subject heading of one of his earlier emails] just because it’s the cool thing to do. heck, i tried to do that with built to spill. but i couldn’t do it. no matter how “cool” i thought they were (or how cool my peers thought they were) i still couldn’t get past the fact that they sucked. but what if i had liked them? what if my desire to be like my peers made me discover a band that was legitimately good? does it make that band less “good” just because of the means by which i discovered them? i agree, death cab may be the darlings of the moment, but i’ve listened to them and loved them since their second album. they’ve always been good (my opinion) and i still like what they’re doing regardless of their popularity.

side note: i know what you’re talking about when you ask if it makes me angry that “i liked them way back when” and others are just “jumping on the cool train”, but i really don’t feel that way. i don’t have the copyright on liking good music. if i truly like them and think they are a good band, then why wouldn’t i have the faith in them that, if given the chance, others would like them as well? it’s not like my tastes are sooo strange that no one will possibly get where i’m coming from. if you truly like dressy bessy, then why would it irk you when other people start to like them too? isn’t the band good? isn’t that what drew you to them in the first place? it does make me throw out the stories of, “so, yeah, i saw them way back in the day in this tiny little club…” more often, but that’s cool. those will be my stories.

and i surely don’t agree that being on a major label makes your music suck. there’s just way too many stories that show otherwise. sure, some bands get on a label and go downhill, but what are the odds that they would’ve gone downhill anyway? how many bands never make it to a major label and they still go downhill. most all of them, unfortunately. i agree that most of the bands that i like don’t get the exposure that i think they deserve, but that’s probably because my tastes are slightly outside the norm. not much, just slightly. but i think the really good bands that make it (hopefully) won’t change to fit the mainstream. the beatles are a perfect example. the mainstream came to them, not the other way around. they made the music that became mainstream, simply because it was really great music. not because they made music that they thought people would like to hear. they made the music that they wanted to hear, and it just so happens that they struck a chord with the world and as a result everybody wanted to hear it.

whew. that was a long one.

check.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 6:57 PM

Alright, are you just playing devil’s advocate with the whole, isn’t good music good despite exposure or label?’ I believe that “the man” can for sure ruin bands/music. Heck, Kurt killed himself because the man ruined it for him. I think that the man ruins good bands music more than not. The exposure goes to their head or whatever. And then the music suffers. Another example, the shins. The shins are ok. They deserve the exposure more than most. But this 40 year old not cool guy here at work was like, I like the shins. So he played this downloaded song on this computer and which song was it? The same ONE that has been on like, 3 movie soundtracks and all over tv. He’s just trying to be cool but doesn’t want to or doesn’t know how to go about finding his own tunes. So he just picks whatever the man tells him is cool. Another example (or rant) it’s popular around here these days for high school kids to wear these vintage inspired Led Zeppelin and Stones t shirts. Led being the more popular. And I just want to go up to them and ask, ok, name me five Zeppelin songs and ‘stairway’ can’t be one of them. And I bet they couldn’t do it. Also, look how original and individualistic I am, I got a new tattoo. Wanna be original? then DON’T get a tattoo. ‘The man’ is ramped. Do you remember M2 before it became mtv2? It was beyond awesome. The muffs videos and even cooler than that. It got a little popular and the man stepped in and said, let’s make this REAL popular and ruin it. They crapped in our mouths and called it a sundae.

Yeah I would like it if people liked dressy bessy. Even if they didn’t find it themselves. But when I draw the line is when it becomes so popular that it’s the man that introduces them to it. It IS possible for bands to become popular and stay pure but it’s not very likely. Not likely at all. Can you imagine Jayd being told how to write songs and what to change by a 55 year old not cool label owner/investor? Not only would be he miserable but it would ruin it for everybody.

Hey I just got your message and yeah, it’s been fun. I haven’t had a music discussion like this in a long time and it was far over due. I agree music talk is better than politics. That’s just plain tiring. This guy went on and on about anti bush this and that and I was just exhausted by the end.

I’m at work and there is like 8 people yapping in my ears and I’m guessing my sentence structure has suffered for it. So if something doesn’t make sense, that’s why.

Your move, sir heller

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 12:23 AM

wow. that’s a lot to respond to. here we go.

kurt cobain killing himself had nothing to do with “the man”. believe me, being a past nirvana junky i can tell you my resume of nirvana literature (read, not written) is extensive, and kurt most definitely killed himself because of a physical ailment that he had suffered from for years. many doctors think it was some sort of spinal issue exacerbated by playing guitar left-handed. this is why he had been so strung out on heroin, in an attempt to self-medicate. musically, i think the stuff that they released at the end was some of their best stuff to date. in utero is my favorite album for sure.

the shins. i really dig the shins. i agree, new slang, has been heard just about everywhere. but it’s still a great song. i guess here is where we run into a disagreement. you say that ‘the man’ tells your friend to like it because it’s cool. i think (in this instance) ‘the man’ picked this song because it was a good song, and your friend heard it because it had so much exposure. i would definitely agree though that this is not always the case. (i.e. – the macarena?) i would think though, if this guy at your work really likes the shins, as he says he does, that he would realize that that song is from their first album and that they have a lot of great stuff released since then (well, one album. but it’s really good). maybe your friend’s a liar.

i hate led zepplin. i wouldn’t wear a shirt. i wouldn’t listen to an album. i don’t get it. tatoos are lame. mtv2 used to be killer. m2 blows. but the businessmen and marketers and whoever else running mtv aren’t idiots. i don’t believe for a second that they changed mtv2 because they wanted to shove crap down our throats. they have marketing and research departments. these departments told the decision makers, “hey, if you stop playing the stone roses and the muffs and start playing fitty cent and ludacris, more people will watch.” the sad part about that, is that they’re right. they don’t care what’s popular, they just care about the $. if everyone across america loved and wanted the muffs, believe me we’d have an all muffs station before too long.

“They crapped in our mouths and called it a sundae.” this is one of the funniest things i’ve heard in a long time. unfortunately (see above paragraph), there are far too many people who love the taste of crap.

“Can you imagine Jayd being told how to write songs and what to change by a 55 year old not cool label owner/investor?” but i’m not sure that that’s what happens. i guess we don’t really know what goes on behind the scenes of a major record label. i really don’t believe that there’s some labelguy telling the gorillaz what their music needs to sound like. i could be wrong i guess, but i just don’t see it. now, i know that that’s not always true. i have to believe that someone was pulling the strings of n’sync and the b-street boys. but is that the case with your average rock band? i don’t know. maybe. maybe not. i’m sure coldplay is doing it their way. u2, metallica, the list could go on and on. but i think most bands do what they want with minimal label input. if it doesn’t work out, they get dropped.

“I think that the man ruins good bands music more than not. The exposure goes to their head or whatever. And then the music suffers.” i would hardly blame ‘the man’ for exposure going to a bands head and the music suffering as a result. that would be the bands inability to handle exposure. they should’ve never signed the contract. the poison pen.

man, it’s way too late for me to be writing all of this stuff. i’m dying. i’m going to bed. fun, fun, fun.

take your best shot. (will this ever end? not that i’m looking forward to it or anything, but i bet that if this conversation were had face to face it would’ve lasted an hour at most. email really drags out the process. : ) )

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 2:58 AM

it’s 3am so i’ll start this now and finish it tomorrow. first of all i think ‘the man’ has clouded your vision, young jedi.

“hey, if you stop playing the stone roses and the muffs and start playing fitty cent and ludacris, more people will watch.” the sad part about that, is that they’re right. they don’t care what’s popular, they just care about the $.” they just care about money is right. and who cares about money alone? THE MAN!!!! and i know for a fact that the new green day album (from last summer) was strings pulled by the label to be cool. “ok, you guys are getting old now so make songs about hating Bush and start to wear eye make up”

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 8:48 AM

i’ll give a short retort and wait for you to finish where you were headed. i’m not saying that ‘the man’ doesn’t exist. of course he cares only about money, there’s no debate about that. and i’d be interested to know where you got this “fact” about green day.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 10:40 AM

isn’t it obvious? about green day? i don’t need to read about it to know it’s true. it’s called, figure it out. it was either the man telling them or them scrambling to still reach a popular crowd. weezer has gone that way (although not as obvious) and Fountains of wayne did it with their last album. either way, it sucks. why have watered down crap when the pure stuff is available just waiting for you. it just may be a little harder to find. look what the man did to Gwen? went from way underground band from o.c. to pop star piece o crap diva or something. if that’s not the man, then i don’t know what is.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 10:53 AM

“Can you imagine Jayd being told how to write songs and what to change by a 55 year old not cool label owner/investor?” but i’m not sure that that’s what happens. i guess we don’t really know what goes on behind the scenes of a major record label.” i might not know about labels per se, but i know about tv shows. and clothing lines (suener works for many) and nobody does a THING without the owner/exec’s approval. i mean nothing. and i work for a tiny nobody company working on a tiny tiny show that no one is gonna watch. i can’t imagine working for a large NBC show or something. same thing with suener’s job. they have to get everything approved by the owner, who by the way is 65 years old! and lemme tell ya, these execs and owners, don’t know crap about crap. they make demands and changes that are retarded. but you know what, the public stills eats it up cause most people just do whatever ‘the man’ tells them is cool. (and the man has his hands in indie stuff too, don’t be fooled by that. it’s a large enough demographic for the man to take interest) so tv shows or clothing lines or labels. it all works the same. there are some bands/artist that have a free range. Seinfeld for example. but only after 4 or 5 seasons of success (i know my history on this) the NBC goons wanted to change the show so much at one point that Larry David (seinfeld’s pal and co creator of the show) quit on several different occasions until NBC finally gave in. then after a while, they let them alone. the fact that they wanted to change the show, proves they didn’t know anything. i’m not saying that there aren’t bands that have free range, i’m saying they are few a far between and most of them after they start to go down hill, end up in the man’s hands in a desperate attempt to stay cool and popular so they sell out at whatever the cost. it’s a sad fact. if they have free range at one point, it’s only a matter of time. (for most, not all)

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 11:14 AM

dude. you’re way off on this. gwen, i’ll give you. i don’t like where she’s gone, and quite frankly i don’t care. but how can you say that the last fountains of wayne album was a sell out? that album is incredible. granted, stacy’s mom was a little overplayed, but that says nothing of the album. the sweater song was overplayed, but weezers debut was (and is) still a great album. and i haven’t a clue as to why weezers new album would be considered a sell out. you’ll have to explain that to me. and don’t sell green day short. is it possible that they did this all on their own? it’s not like the anti-bush stance is anything new. nofx have been doing it since bush sr. green day did nothing radical by putting out a concept album about the state of the union. as far as the eye make-up goes, once again, nothing new. they have had their hair every color imaginable and it’s a surprise when they decide to throw on a little eye make-up? i don’t doubt that ‘the man’ has a place in popular music. maybe we can write gwen off as a casualty of war, but i think you need to set aside the notion of some huge conspiracy. sometimes, bands do what bands do. just because you don’t like it, doesn’t automatically make it the fault of ‘the man’. sometimes those bands that you so love, just make a retarded decision (weezers green album).

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 11:24 AM

okay, i think we’re getting a little closer to a meeting point. i’ll agree with everything you said about the t.v. and clothing industry, but i don’t think that the comparison with the record industry completely holds water. a slight difference is that the owner of a clothing store or television network is the owner. he’s the top dog. in the record business, even though there is a president of a label, the band is still writing the songs, the music is getting put out under their name, etc…, i think that they have a little more say than a guy shooting a pilot or designing clothes. i think as a whole, bands have more freedom.

i really don’t know where i want to go with this now. i think that’s all i have to say. my last email said most of it.

go.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:13 PM

keep your hands inside the email at all times…

alright, fountains of wayne. alright. it all has to do with them obviously clammering for the spotlight with the stacie’s mom video. here’s the set up. stacie is like 12 and she has a 12 year old boy over after school one day. and stacie’s mom is a naked super model in the backyard. oh sure, they covered up the 5 to 6 inches necessary to get it on tv. well, after this boy lusts after her he goes into the bathroom and masterbates. then stacie opens the door and catches him, her initial shock quickly turns to a grinning acceptance. how despicable!!! how low!! and catchy tunes or not, i’m not giving a band like this, especially one that i used to really like, the time of day. i can’t support them with my money, mind or ears. if someone else doesn’t have the same view or isn’t as possibly neurotic as me about it, then that’s their decision. and shock value on a video is certainly a huge sell out in my book.

and you don’t like Led, that’s cool. i have no Led albums either. but that’s not my point. the point is that these kids who knew nothing about Led now “think they are cool” simply because the man made t shirts and they buy into that. (have you seen the movie Josie and the *censored*-cats? a comedic take on this topic) and why wouldn’t the man be just as interested in music as he is tv or clothes? i think the man doesn’t have to actually be a real live person standing in the back dictating every more. the man’s influence is certainly enough to turn things into junk. it’s kinda like the devil. he’s always there unless you take steps to make sure he’s not. and getting people to believe that the man doesn’t exist or has a minimal role in things is one of the tricks of the man. if i band is going down hill then they are subject to the man’s temptations to sell out. see, it’s just like the devil. 🙂

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:17 PM

oh and about Gwen. i never was a gwen fan. but it’s just another example of how people will like crap just because the man tells them too. certainly she is an extreme example, but the man has his subtle ways to sneak into indie stuff as well. i’m like, when in doubt, it’s the man and don’t fall for it.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:24 PM

is my views on the man cynical, skeptical, and tiring at times? perhaps (the latter being for sure) but no one said finding pure music was gonna be easy. am i missing out on some descent music? probably. but that’s fine by me. it’s like when people say, ‘you’d have more fun if you drank.” i’m like, so but i’m up to the challenge. (only music isn’t a moral issue, my example is a thinly veiled one)

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:33 PM

i like where we’re headed here. i agree, i hate the stacy’s mom video. i only saw it once and really wish i hadn’t. maybe that’s why i downloaded the album instead of buying it properly [editors note to the RIAA: i was only joking when i said this. i didn’t download anything. leave me alone.]. (by the waym that video was based almost entirely from a scene in some movie, i don’t remember which. not excusing the video in the slightest, just some trivia for you) i wouldn’t necessarily say that shock value in a video is a sign of selling out. for some bands, that’s they’re whole game. marilyn manson, love or most likely hate him, is no sell out because he aims to shock people. that’s his whole goal.

josie and the *censored*-cats is a great movie. great social commentary. more adam schlesinger (f.o.w.) masterpices in that film. and i’m not saying that the man is any less interested in music than t.v. or clohing. i’m just saying that i still believe that most bands have a little more freedom then you think they do.

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:35 PM

once again, maybe just a little quick to blame the man. is it just possible that gwen really likes the direction she’s headed? i would say so. i don’t think she’s that big of a sell out. i think she’s an artist that maybe really likes to have some musical diversity. not necessarily the fault of the man. oh i’m sure he’s behind her every step of the way, but i still think she’s leading.

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:43 PM

i would say your views are maybe a little cynical. not tiring, just a little cynical. but then again, mine are probably a little overly optimistic. i just guess i would say that you may want to think twice (and correct me if i’m wrong here) before dismissing all music from major labels as “music of the man”. there’s some really great stuff out there. yes, you might have to look hard, but it’s there. when you get a chance, go to www.kexp.org. it’s one of the best radio stations i’ve listened to in my life. the have archived performances of hundreds of bands that you can stream as well as streaming their live broadcast. you can also stream their broadcast from any time in the last two weeks. yoiu just type in the time and date and it will start playing.

and maybe you might want to try drinking. it is pretty fun. [editors note: this was an attempt at sarcasm on my part. i do not advocate drinking in any way.]

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:43 PM

yeah she might like the way she’s going cause she’s more popular now and makes tons of money but that’s still the man’s influence.

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:45 PM

no way. the man didn’t give her the money. all the kids did. ‘the man’ doesn’t make people popular. we do. he just gives us what he thinks the masses want.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:46 PM

yeah but the give away is that marily manson has always been that way and F.O.W. starting doing it because they needed attention. and that my friend, is the man. check out www.littleradio.com it’s pretty good. thanks for the website, i’ll check it out.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:48 PM

oh dude!!!! you GOTTA check this out. it’s a documentary that i saw on PBS a few years back called the Merchants of Cool. i never bring it up because no one saw it, well it’s out on dvd. you should check it out. oh and you can download it too. you gotta watch this.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/view/

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:51 PM

rad. i’ll definitely check this out.

do you mind of i take our whole conversation back and forth and put it on the heller family.org? i think it’s been really fun and could be entertaining to read.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:54 PM

for 100% for sure, put it on the website. that would be rad!!!!!

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 1:51 PM

yeah the kids gave her the money because the man told them that her new look and sound is cool!!!!!!!! come on man!!!!!!

{STEVEN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 2:07 PM

the chicken or the egg, i guess. this argument could go on forever.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 2:28 PM

see the documentary focuses on the man taking something that is original and then mass marketing it and there by ruining it and even convincing kids, by use of trickery, that the man has nothing whatever to do with it. my original argument about said man, was that they geared music in a certain direction to make it cool. but the man has many different ways of getting what he wants.

{CARNAHAN}
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 8:39 PM

i got your message yesterday. glad you liked the documentary. it should be mentioned that i have these views prior to seeing the film. it just helped me to know that i wasn’t taking crazy pills. and the green day eye make up thing. first of all i don’t know for sure if there was some dude standing there telling them what to do. i do know however that the label provides stylist for some bands. plus the whole eye make up thing, it’s just painfully obvious when someone’s trying too hard.

words