She tweeted this out on Christmas Eve, perhaps as a nice gift for followers in Twitter: "The girls and I on Page 3."
FLASHBACK: "Lacey Banghard Topless Zoo Photo Outtakes September 2012," and "Lacey Banghard Never-Ending L.A. Summer."
Tampilkan postingan dengan label twitter. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label twitter. Tampilkan semua postingan
Rabu, 26 Desember 2012
Senin, 24 Desember 2012
'Hanging on the Telephone'
Via Killian and Kurt Loder, "Taking punk platinum: How #Blondie’s “Parallel Lines” was made" (on Twitter).
It's about Mike Chapman as much as it is about Blondie (one band I never did see back in the day).
One number for which she didn't have to put pen to paper was Parallel Lines' dynamic opening track, 'Hanging On The Telephone', which was also the opener on a 1976 EP by guitarist Jack Lee's short-lived LA power pop trio, the Nerves. Blondie had shared a bill with the Nerves on one of their first visits to the West Coast, and they had already worked on the song by the time they introduced it to Mike Chapman.It's a long piece, but fascinating.
"That track was magic from the beginning," he says. "Unlike some of the others, it was an easy one to cut because it was more like Blondie's normal, frantic sort of style, and I also vibed it up a lot. Initially, they didn't know quite how much to put into it, but I told them, 'Look, this is more like the stuff on your first two records. Let's give it that sort of punk/new wave attitude.' I knew that the energy level on that track would make or break it. If we didn't have that energy we'd miss the point, because the musical structure of the song is very tense — it sits you on the end of your chair, and we had to have a track that did the same thing.
"They were all very much into giving it that full-on energy, and of course this was Clem's favourite way of playing. If he really liked something, that in itself added extra energy. So, I think we did four takes and I then took the best one to work on and fix things. If there was a guitar mistake or a bass mistake, we'd punch in and out. In those days, I didn't cut the tape a lot like I'd do later on."
While Burke's sharp drumming and Nigel Harrison's pumping bass are punctuated by Frank Infante's electrifying, punk-edged guitar lines, 'Hanging On The Telephone' is nevertheless powered right from the start by Deborah Harry's energetic, in-your-face vocals as she spits out the song's staccato-style opening lines with machine-gun rapidity: "I'm in the phone booth, it's the one across the hall. If you don't answer, I'll just ring it off the wall. I know he's there, but I just had to call..."
"Debbie always got it right away whenever I tried to describe what to do, but a lot of the phrasing was totally down to her," Chapman states. "She has a strange way of delivering certain phrases, and I found myself accepting things from her that I never would have accepted from anyone else. I would have had other people change it, whereas with her I'd think, 'No, no, no, I've got to leave it like that,' or else it just wouldn't be her. For instance, in 'Hanging On The Telephone', the lines 'I heard your mother now she's going out the door. Did she go to work or just go to the store?' — I remember listening to those and thinking, 'This is the dumbest lyric I've ever heard.' However, it was so dumb, it was beautiful, it was brilliant, and when Debbie then sang it in her inimitable way it suddenly sounded even funnier. It just sounded like the weirdest, most bizarre thing I'd ever heard."
It's about Mike Chapman as much as it is about Blondie (one band I never did see back in the day).
Jumat, 21 Desember 2012
Erik Loomis and Free Speech
As 99% or so of folks who read this blog probably already know, Erik Loomis, a labor and environmental historian, Assistant Professor at the University of Rhode Island, and blogger at Lawyers, Guns, and Money, has been under public attack following his posting the following angry tweet a week ago today:
Given that Loomis does not have tenure, that some opponents were calling for his firing, and that his institution has fundamentally misrepresented his actions in a public statement, I believe it is particularly important that his fellow academics, especially those of us who also blog, to defend Loomis from these attacks. The bloggers who put together the Crooked Timber statement have asked other bloggers to support it and have set up a comment thread on which you can do so. I already have expressed my support on it (along with about a thousand others at this writing); I urge you to do so as well.* That's the primary purpose of this post.
Its secondary purpose is to create an open thread to discuss this case...perhaps even in an historical context (as would befit this blog). So have at it!
A few more thoughts below the fold...
First, I wanted to link to some other materials on this case. It was covered today by Inside Higher Ed. The foreign policy blog Duck of Minerva also issued a statement supporting Loomis's free speech rights. One of the most thoughtful letters to the URI administration was written by UNM history professor Virginia Scharff.
Though the URI administration has yet to respond (at least publicly) to the criticism of its statement, some of the leading academic conservative bloggers who had attacked Loomis for his tweet have, at least, explicitly stated that he probably shouldn't be fired (perhaps because they themselves have used violent rhetoric in the past).
Finally, I wanted to say that my wholehearted endorsement of the Crooked Timber statement should not be read as enthusiasm for Loomis's now-infamous tweet. While it was in no way an incitement to violence, I'm not a great fan of violent rhetoric like this. Loomis himself has expressed regret about employing it, if only because it (pretty predictably) became a distraction from the real issues raised by the Newtown shootings. My disagreements with using such language run a little deeper. However, I almost didn't add this thought to this post, because I think it is quite beside the point when one is talking about the free speech issues raised by the campaign against Loomis and addressed by the Crooked Timber statement (which are the principal topics of this post). One does not always defend free speech that one likes...indeed, if one is committed to free speech, one often defends speech that one doesn't. And pointing out one's dislikes while issuing such defenses of speech can, in a sense, detract from those defenses.
_____________________________
* It should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway, that I do these things as an individual and that I am not speaking for this blog nor for the Society for U.S. Intellectual History, which are not in the habit of issuing collective statements and have no plans to begin doing so at the moment. I'd also add that I think this is basically a good thing, as issuing truly collective statements can often be a complicated and contentious matter. Indeed, even Crooked Timber attributed its statement to the individual bloggers signing it, not to the blog collectively.
I was heartbroken in the first 20 mass murders. Now I want Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick.Loomis was initially denounced by conservatives who falsely accused him of calling for the murder of Wayne LaPierre (who is head of the National Rifle Association). Within days he had received visits from the Rhode Island State Police and his Dean. Earlier this week, the President of the University of Rhode Island issued the following statement:
The University of Rhode Island does not condone acts or threats of violence. These remarks do not reflect the views of the institution and Erik Loomis does not speak on behalf of the University. The University is committed to fostering a safe, inclusive and equitable culture that aspires to promote positive change.In response, bloggers at Crooked Timber, one of the leading academic blogs, issued a statement of their own on Wednesday, the nut 'graph of which reads as follows:
Even to suggest that Loomis’s tweet constitutes a “threat of violence” is an offense against the English language. We are dismayed that the university president completely fails to acknowledge the importance of academic freedom and of scholars’ freedom independently to express views (even intemperate ones) on topics of public importance. This statement—unless it is swiftly corrected— should give alarm to scholars at the University of Rhode Island, to scholars who might one day consider associating themselves with this institution, and to academic and professional associations that value academic freedom.If you haven't done so yet, please go and read the whole thing. Among the most important other points they make is that, while this case raises issues of academic freedom, in fact, what's happened to Loomis is part of a much broader issue: the ability that employers in general have to punish their employees for expressing unpopular political views that have no bearing whatsoever on the performance of their jobs.
Given that Loomis does not have tenure, that some opponents were calling for his firing, and that his institution has fundamentally misrepresented his actions in a public statement, I believe it is particularly important that his fellow academics, especially those of us who also blog, to defend Loomis from these attacks. The bloggers who put together the Crooked Timber statement have asked other bloggers to support it and have set up a comment thread on which you can do so. I already have expressed my support on it (along with about a thousand others at this writing); I urge you to do so as well.* That's the primary purpose of this post.
Its secondary purpose is to create an open thread to discuss this case...perhaps even in an historical context (as would befit this blog). So have at it!
A few more thoughts below the fold...
First, I wanted to link to some other materials on this case. It was covered today by Inside Higher Ed. The foreign policy blog Duck of Minerva also issued a statement supporting Loomis's free speech rights. One of the most thoughtful letters to the URI administration was written by UNM history professor Virginia Scharff.
Though the URI administration has yet to respond (at least publicly) to the criticism of its statement, some of the leading academic conservative bloggers who had attacked Loomis for his tweet have, at least, explicitly stated that he probably shouldn't be fired (perhaps because they themselves have used violent rhetoric in the past).
Finally, I wanted to say that my wholehearted endorsement of the Crooked Timber statement should not be read as enthusiasm for Loomis's now-infamous tweet. While it was in no way an incitement to violence, I'm not a great fan of violent rhetoric like this. Loomis himself has expressed regret about employing it, if only because it (pretty predictably) became a distraction from the real issues raised by the Newtown shootings. My disagreements with using such language run a little deeper. However, I almost didn't add this thought to this post, because I think it is quite beside the point when one is talking about the free speech issues raised by the campaign against Loomis and addressed by the Crooked Timber statement (which are the principal topics of this post). One does not always defend free speech that one likes...indeed, if one is committed to free speech, one often defends speech that one doesn't. And pointing out one's dislikes while issuing such defenses of speech can, in a sense, detract from those defenses.
_____________________________
* It should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway, that I do these things as an individual and that I am not speaking for this blog nor for the Society for U.S. Intellectual History, which are not in the habit of issuing collective statements and have no plans to begin doing so at the moment. I'd also add that I think this is basically a good thing, as issuing truly collective statements can often be a complicated and contentious matter. Indeed, even Crooked Timber attributed its statement to the individual bloggers signing it, not to the blog collectively.
Rabu, 12 Desember 2012
Clueless Caroline Loves Her Some Uruguayan Homosexuals
Professor Caroline Heldman tweeted on the vote of Uruguay's lower house for homosexual marriage. I'm thinking BFD, right? So I tweeted her, and she tweets back calling U.S. marriage traditionalists "knuckledraggers":
Not so sure about this lady's intelligence. I was being facetious. And Uruguay is hardly the model of progressive politics. But that's lame-brain leftism for you.
And recall from 2009: "Professor Caroline Heldman Clueless on Politics of Town Halls."
CARTOON CREDIT: Legal Insurrection.
@ampowerblog Knuckle draggers in the states indeed!
— Caroline Heldman (@carolineheldman) December 12, 2012
Not so sure about this lady's intelligence. I was being facetious. And Uruguay is hardly the model of progressive politics. But that's lame-brain leftism for you.
And recall from 2009: "Professor Caroline Heldman Clueless on Politics of Town Halls."
CARTOON CREDIT: Legal Insurrection.
Sabtu, 08 Desember 2012
Instagram Disables Twitter Card Integration
I noticed this the other day while embedding a tweet, from Nick Bilton at NYT Bits "Twitter Loses Ability to Properly Display Instagram Photos":
Welcome to the Photo Wars.
Instagram on Wednesday disabled the ability for Twitter to properly display Instagram photos on its Web site and in its applications. The move escalates tensions between the two companies, which were once friends in the battle against Facebook but have now become direct competitors.
In a status update on Twitter’s Web site, the company said Instagram had disabled its integration with Twitter cards, which are used to display images and content within Twitter messages.
“Users are experiencing issues with viewing Instagram photos on Twitter,” the post said. “This is due to Instagram disabling its Twitter cards integration, and as a result, photos are being displayed using a pre-cards experience.”
Speaking at the LeWeb technology conference, Kevin Systrom, Instagram’s chief executive, confirmed that the company has removed the ability to send pictures to Twitter, and plans to completely cut off embedding pictures on the Twitter Web site.
“We’ve decided that right now, what makes sense, is to direct our users to the Instagram Web site,” Mr. Systrom said, noting that Instagram images will soon no longer be visible on Twitter. “Obviously things change as a company evolves.”
Mr. Systrom did not say when images will cesase to show up on the site.
Sabtu, 20 Oktober 2012
Andrew Malcolm Dissects New Media and the Future of Journalism
A great clip.
Nick Gillespie talks to Andrew Malcolm:
Nick Gillespie talks to Andrew Malcolm:
Jumat, 03 Agustus 2012
USIH on Twitter
Hey USIH Tweets. Check out the cool new Twitter feed that LD set up (to the right of your screen). The first tracks the usual #USIH hastag. The other tracks the new #USIH12 hashtag for the upcoming conference. Since we're on the topic. Who do you think all intellectual historians should follow on Twitter? List their handles in the comments section. Here are just a few people who I find essential following:
@LDBurnett
@adamgolub
@CoreyRobin
@ErikLoomis
@cliu_uc
@marginalutility
@jnthnwwlsn
@historianess
@kelly_j_baker
@nils_gilman
@jhrees
And you can follow me if you're so inclined at@HartmanAndrew
And you can follow me if you're so inclined at
Rabu, 23 November 2011
Twittering
Here are some of Moravec's thoughts on the conference (
hey guess what it can be BOTH an intellectual history panel AND a Women's Studies panel #SUSIH
hmm well WHY has it taken so long for women's history & intellectual history to meet up? #SUSIH
yes ideas can't transcend embodiment unless you are bodied in the norm (mythical white male norm) #SUSIH
writing about women of color intellectuals as an act of willful anachronism because they had no "discourse community." Maria Cotera #SUSIH
welcoming = outreach, which means something is wrong with your discourse community #SUSIH
tweeting conference papers. click on #SUSIH to get narrative MRT @ProfessMoravec it's so hard to understand
decentering the subject as project of radical feminism linked to death of the author? Links b/n black nationalism & radical feminism #SUSIH
intellectual history has narrative, historiography, individuals are important as exemplars of larger things, use women as such #SUSIH
when you travel b/n social movement you co-author/co-edit yet you are forced to give up certain benefits in that process #SUSIH
native ethnographers turned to mixed genre story telling, a literary voice allows difference to be authority. #SUSIH
Maria Cotera, University of Michigan mechanics of invisibilization how do dominant intellectual history narratives exclude? #SUSIH
Political theory message oppressions damage all sorts of people, not just women. anti-normative "black queer thought" intersectional #SUSIH
Plenary Event, 6:00-8:00 p.m. (C201-202)
U.S. Women’s Intellectual Traditions (Roundtable) Introduction of panel by Mike O’Connor, chair, 2011 conference committee Chair: Louise W. Knight, Northwestern University Maria Cotera, University of Michigan Megan Marshall, Emerson College Philippa Strum, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Sherie M. Randolph, University of Michigan |
No says SC Contributing to discipline, a writing life, or learning demonstration. For SC register=scholarly voice w/ tone & quality #SUSIH
NEXT UP Steven Weiland, Michigan St Univ “Academic Autobiography and Intellectual History: The Late Life Register of Stanley Cavell” #SUSIH
movement from theology to less well defined intellectual space, Beyond God The Father pivotal work in this move #SUSIH
Daly's persistent anxiety about her academic credentials "Dr Mary Daly ... is an imposter" #SUSIH
Kathryn Telling, University of Nottingham Mary Daly’s Changing Relation to Institutionalized Education, 1968-2006 #SUSIH
Panel C3
C203
C203
Biography, Autobiography and Memoir in American Intellectual History
Mark Smith, University of Texas at Austin
“What Makes a Good Biography from an Intellectual History Perspective?: Grappling with Richmond Pearson Hobson”
Steven Weiland, Michigan State University
“Academic Autobiography and Intellectual History: The Late Life Register of Stanley Cavell”
Kathryn Telling, University of Nottingham
“‘Unfree, Uncourageous, and Radically Uneducated’: Mary Daly’s Changing Relation to Institutionalized Education, 1968-2006”
Chair/Commentator: Marilyn Fischer, University of DaytonWho gets to decide what actions count as “protests” why are some actions considered politically significant #SUSIH
hmmm Who produces ideas & who gets to decide what counts as ideas, whose ideas count do you have to be seeking ” the meta-narrative? #SUSIH
leads to splintering between praxis and professionalism, the influence of local workers declined #SUSIH
NU professionalized social work at Atl Univ which diminished ties to academic sociologists and practicing social workers #SUSIH
1914 NU oversaw almost all aspect of ATL black neighborhoods settlement house, municipal housekeeping, educational etc #SUSIH
Neighborhood Union (1908) woman sickened & neighbor's didn't notice until too late. or 1899 single black mothers needed help #SUSIH
next up Jennifer Eckel, UT “‘And Thy Neighbor as Thyself’: Atlanta University Sociology and Lugenia Burns Hope's Neighborhood Union” #SUSIH
IR =persuade individuals out of their racism, gradually gave way to forced change with mixed results #SUSIH
IR = insight. Juliette Derricotte dialogue across races = personal transformation and change #SUSIH
3 views on inter-racialism (via Marion Cuthbert) magical, nauseating, real insight #SUSIH
Panel B4
C204
C204
Islands in the Southern Stream? Safety, Sublimation and Interracialism on Black College Campuses, 1874-1930
Jennifer Eckel, University of Texas
“‘And Thy Neighbor as Thyself’: Atlanta University Sociology and Lugenia Burns Hope's Neighborhood Union”
Lauren Kientz Anderson, University of Kentucky
“A Nauseating Sentiment, a Magical Device, or a Real Insight? Interracialism at Fisk University in 1930”
Chair/Commentator: James A. Levy, University of Wisconsin, WhitewaterHeather Murray quite possibly most tweetable comment on panel EVER "politics of the orgasm" #SUSIH #twitterstorians
Heather Murray comments Hannah Arendt "Self-Hating Jewess Writes Pro-Eichmann Series for the New Yorker" #SUSIH
WLM participated in radical therapy movement, therapy change not adjustment so OK for feminism, RTM also rejected trad. psych #SUSIH
1.women's lib familiar w/ therapeutic discourses 2.vareity of ther. disc. stressed human potential 3.feminists selectively adopted #2 #SUSIH
rejected psych experts as normalizing gender roles, at same time as embraced ideas about self and society from psych #twitterstorians #SUSIH
CR was therapy despite radical #feminist denials, but still political perspective and purpose. #twitterstorians #SUSIH
resituate women's liberation not from #socialmovements but postwar U.S. therapeutic culture. Consciousness is psych #twitterstorians #SUSIH
3rd ppr Voichita Nachescu “Radical Feminism and the Psychotherapeutic Sensibility" #twitterstorians #SUSIH
neuro psych grasp of brain bio --> self as organism. Anxiety=organism's reaction to a state of catastrophe unfree #SUSIH #twitterstorians
M.D. view anxiety pathological condition that interferes with interpersonal relationships, cure = love #SUSIH #twitterstorians
heidegger anxiety has no fixed obj but cause is "being as such" #SUSIH #Twitterstorians
kirk. Anxiety has an indeterminate object unlike fear. Stems from theological guilt over original sin #twitterstorians #SUSIH
Kierkegaard anxiety = feminine weakness. Now medical dx via 3 step secularization medicalization pharmacologization #SUSIH #twitterstorians
Kenneth Clark doll studies --> pscyhological damage of racism (ll process for jews) --> S.C. Brown decision #twitterstorians #SUSIH
oh goody #bourne & #cultural #pluralism! sympathy req 4 modernism (cosmopolitanism) req. reject of former ways? #twitterstorians #SUSIH
A smith Imagined condemnation by impartial observer leads self to ID with them over self, sympathy regulates self #twitterstorians #SUSIH
Direct line from Adam Smith Sympathy to 20th American sociology #SUSIH #twitterstorians
Self-hating as veiled criticism n liberal discourse of lack of commitment to ID politics/failure to act #SUSIH #twitterstorians
1st up Daniel Wickberg UT, Dallas “Sympathy & Self-Hatred" or liberalism & the psychoanalytical turn in P '45 US #SUSIH #twitterstorians
deja vu already overheard 2 conversations about should we encourage students to apply to grad school. #twitterstorians #SUSIH
Session A, 10:00-11:45 a.m.
Panel A1 C201 | Psychology, Psychiatry and American Social Thought Daniel Wickberg, University of Texas at Dallas “Sympathy and Self-Hatred in American Social Thought” Simon Taylor, Columbia University “The Influence of Anxiety: American Psychiatry and the Culture of Dread, 1950-1970” Voichita Ileana Nachescu, Raritan Valley Community College “Radical Feminism and the Psychotherapeutic Sensibility of the 1960s” Chair/Commentator: Heather Murray, University of Ottawa |
first panel about to begin Psychology, Psychiatry and American Social Thought us-intellectual-history.blogspot.com/2011/08/progra… #twitterstorians #SUSIH
Th and Fri this week, live tweeting from U.S. Intellectual History conf Don't miss the fun us-intellectual-history.blogspot.com/2011/11/confer… #SUSIH #twitterstorians
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)