I love it when you read a book, and it leads you to a decision.
For instance, within one chapter of reading Stiff, I decided I was going to donate my body to science. I even Tweeted about it (remember, once something hits Twitter, it cannot be refuted).
Well, I decided that if my organs cannot be salvaged, that I would like to be donated to science. For whatever cause. They can use my cadaver in car impact testings, gun testing, anatomy labs, whatever. I don't care! It's a body, and once I'm dead I have no use for it.
So, thanks Mary Roach, for writing Stiff. Now I need to get a will or something... Law-Man probably doesn't take Twitter as a serious edict.
Roach wrote this novel in order to discover something new: she discusses how she's traveled all over the world as a journalist and had seen everything five times. Then, she "began to look for the foreign lands between the cracks. Science was one such land. Science involving the dead was particularly foreign and strange and, in its repellent way, enticing" (14). This led her to study what happens to human bodies once they cease to live. And boy! What interesting things we do to them. Or decline to.
I recommend this book for anyone with morbid curiosities. Some people will likely be grossed out about this. If you don't like reading about faces being peeled back and how a body decomposes, don't read it.
This novel was written in 2003, so I am a quite behind in its coolness. For example, Roach discusses Plastination—the substitution of body fluids with plastic, which enables bodies to be preserved for eternity. And made a show out of! At press, she mentions that BodyWorlds hadn't been shown in the U.S.
In 2006 some of the Biker Ghouls stormed Vancouver, B.C. to visit the Bodyworlds exhibit. Last year it came near us in Portland, Oregon. Apparently America got over its squeamishness in the years since this book was published.
Sorry for the BodyWorlds tangent. One who likes Stiff must like BodyWorlds and vice versa. Now, other than reading this book for morbid curiosity, you could also read it to learn something. Roach not only discusses what donating a body to science could entail, but she discusses alternatives. Cremation? Burial? Getting shot into space? Why are some cultures so opposed to certain practices?
If you want to donate your body to science, check out a medical school in your state. Fill out the forms in the presence of witnesses, and you should be OK. Of course, your survivors can always decline this, even if it's your wish; therefore, you should let your family know of your intentions and how serious you are about it. Check out Living Bank for more details.
KK
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Watchmen by Alan Moore/Dave Gibbons
I admit. I picked up Watchmen because I saw the trailer for the film.
At The Dark Knight's premiere, one of the previews started with a familiar song--the Smashing Pumpkin's "The Beginning is the End is the Beginning". You may think that sounds familiar... that's because "The End is the Beginning is the End" was a single off the Batman & Robin soundtrack (it also won the Pumpkins a Grammy for Best Hard Rock Performance). Anyway, do you follow? "The Beginning" was the closing song on the soundtrack, and was a bit of a reprise of "The End."
Anyhow, both Watchmen and Batman are DC properties, so we'll pretend we didn't know that they recycled a Batman and Robin song for this movie's trailer. It's really quite OK—I love to see the Pumpkins get some love.
Ok, back to my point: I read Watchmen because there is a blockbuster film coming out next year based on it. Because of this fact, and that there is a fully naked character, I decided to read the graphic novel.
My friend Matt pointed out that I committed some sort of sacrilege because it took me so long to read it. Like, I picked it up 10 days ago and just finished it last night. Sorry, man, sometimes ya just don't feel like reading.
When I finished reading it last night, I tweeted "Finished Watchmen. Not sure she can write a review..."
It's not that I didn't spend time thinking while reading the novel. I don't know what it was, but I'm just not feeling the "gettin' all intellectual" business.
To help me write this review, last night I wrote on a notecard:
WTF just happened?
Life goes on!
Seems like a big deal. Impact.
But all resumes, regardless.
The ending of the comic was quite jarring. I guess too many superhero movies have led me to believe that everybody turns out good in the end. But in this one, it is very murky. You want to think Dr. Manhattan is a good guy, because he can control, like, everything, but look what he does to Rorschach! Of course, he had to, in order to keep the cover-up in place. But why was Adrian's plan correct? Because Adrian is the smartest self-made man?
Maybe those who plotted 9/11 were thinking along the same lines as Adrian. Except they used hijacked planes, not a terrifying monster. Or when the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki-we said murder 200,000 to save the world...
Anyway. I'm done thinking about it. I just can't wait to see if the book gets butchered when it's turn into a film.
I highly suggest reading it. Watchmen is extremely intelligent... and one of my favorite things to point out during reviews is relevance. And it is hella relevant!
It's a good thing for superheros—our Watchmen—to not be good through-and-through, I suppose. I shall read this again and maybe think about it a little more.
KK
At The Dark Knight's premiere, one of the previews started with a familiar song--the Smashing Pumpkin's "The Beginning is the End is the Beginning". You may think that sounds familiar... that's because "The End is the Beginning is the End" was a single off the Batman & Robin soundtrack (it also won the Pumpkins a Grammy for Best Hard Rock Performance). Anyway, do you follow? "The Beginning" was the closing song on the soundtrack, and was a bit of a reprise of "The End."
Anyhow, both Watchmen and Batman are DC properties, so we'll pretend we didn't know that they recycled a Batman and Robin song for this movie's trailer. It's really quite OK—I love to see the Pumpkins get some love.
Ok, back to my point: I read Watchmen because there is a blockbuster film coming out next year based on it. Because of this fact, and that there is a fully naked character, I decided to read the graphic novel.
My friend Matt pointed out that I committed some sort of sacrilege because it took me so long to read it. Like, I picked it up 10 days ago and just finished it last night. Sorry, man, sometimes ya just don't feel like reading.
When I finished reading it last night, I tweeted "Finished Watchmen. Not sure she can write a review..."
It's not that I didn't spend time thinking while reading the novel. I don't know what it was, but I'm just not feeling the "gettin' all intellectual" business.
To help me write this review, last night I wrote on a notecard:
WTF just happened?
Life goes on!
Seems like a big deal. Impact.
But all resumes, regardless.
The ending of the comic was quite jarring. I guess too many superhero movies have led me to believe that everybody turns out good in the end. But in this one, it is very murky. You want to think Dr. Manhattan is a good guy, because he can control, like, everything, but look what he does to Rorschach! Of course, he had to, in order to keep the cover-up in place. But why was Adrian's plan correct? Because Adrian is the smartest self-made man?
Maybe those who plotted 9/11 were thinking along the same lines as Adrian. Except they used hijacked planes, not a terrifying monster. Or when the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki-we said murder 200,000 to save the world...
Anyway. I'm done thinking about it. I just can't wait to see if the book gets butchered when it's turn into a film.
I highly suggest reading it. Watchmen is extremely intelligent... and one of my favorite things to point out during reviews is relevance. And it is hella relevant!
It's a good thing for superheros—our Watchmen—to not be good through-and-through, I suppose. I shall read this again and maybe think about it a little more.
KK
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson
According to Wikipedia, Snow Falling on Cedars was written by a teacher, taking 10 years to complete. The success of this book should give hope everywhere to teachers who want to be writers. But not just because it was a successful—it is also a good read.
David Guterson's novel was published in 1994, and became a huge hit, spawning a film version in 1999. The front cover gives away its superstar status, with a giant "The Award-Winning #1 Bestseller" badge.
"Oh great," I said to myself after examining the book. I came across this novel when Matt and Anna were simplifying their life and giving away books. I had heard of it, so I took it. But I had it for about almost a year before I read it. That "#1 Bestseller" just turns me away. I don't want people to think I read only bestsellers! I don't want want anyone to assume I'm a DaVinci Code fan! (Disclosure: I haven't read that novel, and I don't want to. Don't make me).
Anyway... this novel was a quick read, even though it's 460 pages long. Once I was into it, I didn't want to stop reading! The novel focuses on a murder trial in the '50s, when there was a lot of anti-Japanese racism resulting from WWII. Set on a Washington state island, the story revolves on the trial of Katsuo, who is accused of killing Carl over wanted strawberry farmland. It is easy for the citizens to get caught up in the racism, because they recall all of the Japanese citizens being interned in 1942, and many are war veterans. The internment of Japanese-Americans was a disgraceful action; this novel is a good reminder to us to not forget it. I don't think I heard about citizens being interned until I was in high school—which is pretty outrageous. Remember, kids, we study history lest we repeat it!
Which brings me to the relevance of this novel: it is really easy to read, sure, and very involving. Guterson has a gift for description: the strawberry fields, the snow, the mossy tree, each character's sex life, etc. But there is more to it than pretty words; it really makes you think about racial profiling and stereotyping. Well, Katsuo is a Kendo master, so he must been responsible for Carl's head wound.
I read that Snow Falling on Cedars is taught in many schools (but also banned in some). It is a great novel to teach for things like language, but more so for the potential discussions about racism. It's scary, because in the past seven years, America has painted all of its Arab-American citizens as potential terrorists. So, please read this novel as a reminder not to let these things happen!
KK
David Guterson's novel was published in 1994, and became a huge hit, spawning a film version in 1999. The front cover gives away its superstar status, with a giant "The Award-Winning #1 Bestseller" badge.
"Oh great," I said to myself after examining the book. I came across this novel when Matt and Anna were simplifying their life and giving away books. I had heard of it, so I took it. But I had it for about almost a year before I read it. That "#1 Bestseller" just turns me away. I don't want people to think I read only bestsellers! I don't want want anyone to assume I'm a DaVinci Code fan! (Disclosure: I haven't read that novel, and I don't want to. Don't make me).
Anyway... this novel was a quick read, even though it's 460 pages long. Once I was into it, I didn't want to stop reading! The novel focuses on a murder trial in the '50s, when there was a lot of anti-Japanese racism resulting from WWII. Set on a Washington state island, the story revolves on the trial of Katsuo, who is accused of killing Carl over wanted strawberry farmland. It is easy for the citizens to get caught up in the racism, because they recall all of the Japanese citizens being interned in 1942, and many are war veterans. The internment of Japanese-Americans was a disgraceful action; this novel is a good reminder to us to not forget it. I don't think I heard about citizens being interned until I was in high school—which is pretty outrageous. Remember, kids, we study history lest we repeat it!
Which brings me to the relevance of this novel: it is really easy to read, sure, and very involving. Guterson has a gift for description: the strawberry fields, the snow, the mossy tree, each character's sex life, etc. But there is more to it than pretty words; it really makes you think about racial profiling and stereotyping. Well, Katsuo is a Kendo master, so he must been responsible for Carl's head wound.
I read that Snow Falling on Cedars is taught in many schools (but also banned in some). It is a great novel to teach for things like language, but more so for the potential discussions about racism. It's scary, because in the past seven years, America has painted all of its Arab-American citizens as potential terrorists. So, please read this novel as a reminder not to let these things happen!
KK
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Hell's Angels by Hunter S. Thompson
Both Hunter S. Thompson and the Hell's Angels bring preconceived notions to mind:
Thompson was a crazy sonofabitch. He was a nutbag druggie who liked to blow things up.
The Hell's Angel's are crazy motherfuckers. Remember Altamont? They killed like 500 people while providing concert security for the Rolling Stones.
Both of these notions have some basis in reality. Thompson liked drugs and blowing things up. The Hell's Angels did provide security at Altamont, where one person was killed by an Angel (in self-defense).
It is very fitting that Thompson got close to the Angels in order to write a book, Hell's Angels: A Strange and Terrible Saga (1969). This book is definitely in the vein of Gonzo journalism—Thompson spends nearly a year with the Angels, drinking, going on runs, and having close encounters with the lawmen.
Don't expect to read about some elaborate ritual where Thompson gets initiated into the gang. That doesn't happen. He just hangs around with them enough that they start trusting him (and he doesn't even ride a Harley, but a British bike!). He sees firsthand what runs are like, what parties are like, and what the members do when they aren't together. Turns out the Angels are much more tame than their reputation sells them.
Many are married with a mortgage, but some are unemployed couch-surfers. Neither is unique to the Angels—I'm sure you'll find both types in a Scrapbooking club.
But no one has quite the reputation of the Angels. So, where did this reputation come from?
Guess, c'mon...
Five seconds...
Ok, it was the press. Media is responsible for making the Angels simultaneously feared and revered. Thompson uses excerpts from articles and reports to show how this happened. You may have heard how Thompson got "stomped" out of the club—that's such a brief part of the story, it's in postscript.
Point being, don't read this book expecting to see how brutally Thompson was beat by the Angels. That is not what it is about. It's about a group of men finding common ground and forming a club. The club—and its members and their actions—get blown out of proportion by the media to become a symbol for all that is wrong with sex, drugs, and motorcycles.
Really, they aren't that bad. That's not to say they are good—they just aren't that bad.
I highly recommend reading it, especially if you haven't read anything by Thompson before. I also recommend reading it if you're looking to start a much-feared gang... everything comes down to reputation.
KK
Thompson was a crazy sonofabitch. He was a nutbag druggie who liked to blow things up.
The Hell's Angel's are crazy motherfuckers. Remember Altamont? They killed like 500 people while providing concert security for the Rolling Stones.
Both of these notions have some basis in reality. Thompson liked drugs and blowing things up. The Hell's Angels did provide security at Altamont, where one person was killed by an Angel (in self-defense).
It is very fitting that Thompson got close to the Angels in order to write a book, Hell's Angels: A Strange and Terrible Saga (1969). This book is definitely in the vein of Gonzo journalism—Thompson spends nearly a year with the Angels, drinking, going on runs, and having close encounters with the lawmen.
Don't expect to read about some elaborate ritual where Thompson gets initiated into the gang. That doesn't happen. He just hangs around with them enough that they start trusting him (and he doesn't even ride a Harley, but a British bike!). He sees firsthand what runs are like, what parties are like, and what the members do when they aren't together. Turns out the Angels are much more tame than their reputation sells them.
Many are married with a mortgage, but some are unemployed couch-surfers. Neither is unique to the Angels—I'm sure you'll find both types in a Scrapbooking club.
But no one has quite the reputation of the Angels. So, where did this reputation come from?
Guess, c'mon...
Five seconds...
Ok, it was the press. Media is responsible for making the Angels simultaneously feared and revered. Thompson uses excerpts from articles and reports to show how this happened. You may have heard how Thompson got "stomped" out of the club—that's such a brief part of the story, it's in postscript.
Point being, don't read this book expecting to see how brutally Thompson was beat by the Angels. That is not what it is about. It's about a group of men finding common ground and forming a club. The club—and its members and their actions—get blown out of proportion by the media to become a symbol for all that is wrong with sex, drugs, and motorcycles.
Really, they aren't that bad. That's not to say they are good—they just aren't that bad.
I highly recommend reading it, especially if you haven't read anything by Thompson before. I also recommend reading it if you're looking to start a much-feared gang... everything comes down to reputation.
KK
Monday, October 20, 2008
Still Life with Woodpecker by Tom Robbins
Still Life With Woodpecker by Tom Robbins is "A sort of a love story."
There is a love story, and that is what holds all the randomness, such as redheads, Red Beards, miscarriages, cheerleaders, $20 million pyramids, sex, isolation, bombs, cocaine, Ralph Nader, and royalty together.
Did I mention Ralph Nader? If nothing else, I suggest one read this book because the protagonist has a thing for Ralph Nader. And by thing, I mean she both adores his ideas and wants to hump him.
Still Life is one of those postmodern treats where the author interacts with the reader. Robbins achieves this through occasional rants about his new electric typewriter, a Remington SL3. He isn't sure about this newfangled device: he senses "the novel of my dreams is in the Remington SL3" (ix), but he can't keep up with how fast it allows him to type. So if he gives up on the typewriter, and finishes his novel in longhand, does that mean this awesome book isn't the novel of his dreams?
I haven't read any of Robbins' work besides this, so I can't say if it gets better than this. But this book is pretty damn good. I didn't want to put it down, for a few reasons:
1. The plot is entertaining with some good twists (even if some are predictable)
2. It is naughty; definitely not for the prude
3. Non-sequitur city
4. Those of the Ginger persuasion may be controlling human fate
5. What secret is the Camel pack trying to tell us?
The main question of the novel is "What makes love stay?" Princess Leigh-Cheri really wants to know. Can an outlaw bomber help her figure it out? You may be surprised. I was expecting the Princess to be scorned by the self-proclaimed outlaw Bernard (the Woodpecker), but it didn't quite happen. Maybe outlaws are like cocaine, and that's the lesson. You know you shouldn't do it, but you can't stop yourself. Because you are addicted.
Then again, I know nothing about cocaine... and nothing about dating Outlaws. One time this guy I dated returned a bicycle to Target claiming it was broken when really, he just got sick of riding it to work... and that's the closest I've come to outlaw love.
So, back to the novel:
I recommend you read it. It is wholeheartedly enjoyable. I forgot to mention this, but there is an alien subplot.
KK
There is a love story, and that is what holds all the randomness, such as redheads, Red Beards, miscarriages, cheerleaders, $20 million pyramids, sex, isolation, bombs, cocaine, Ralph Nader, and royalty together.
Did I mention Ralph Nader? If nothing else, I suggest one read this book because the protagonist has a thing for Ralph Nader. And by thing, I mean she both adores his ideas and wants to hump him.
Still Life is one of those postmodern treats where the author interacts with the reader. Robbins achieves this through occasional rants about his new electric typewriter, a Remington SL3. He isn't sure about this newfangled device: he senses "the novel of my dreams is in the Remington SL3" (ix), but he can't keep up with how fast it allows him to type. So if he gives up on the typewriter, and finishes his novel in longhand, does that mean this awesome book isn't the novel of his dreams?
I haven't read any of Robbins' work besides this, so I can't say if it gets better than this. But this book is pretty damn good. I didn't want to put it down, for a few reasons:
1. The plot is entertaining with some good twists (even if some are predictable)
2. It is naughty; definitely not for the prude
3. Non-sequitur city
4. Those of the Ginger persuasion may be controlling human fate
5. What secret is the Camel pack trying to tell us?
The main question of the novel is "What makes love stay?" Princess Leigh-Cheri really wants to know. Can an outlaw bomber help her figure it out? You may be surprised. I was expecting the Princess to be scorned by the self-proclaimed outlaw Bernard (the Woodpecker), but it didn't quite happen. Maybe outlaws are like cocaine, and that's the lesson. You know you shouldn't do it, but you can't stop yourself. Because you are addicted.
Then again, I know nothing about cocaine... and nothing about dating Outlaws. One time this guy I dated returned a bicycle to Target claiming it was broken when really, he just got sick of riding it to work... and that's the closest I've come to outlaw love.
So, back to the novel:
I recommend you read it. It is wholeheartedly enjoyable. I forgot to mention this, but there is an alien subplot.
KK
The Road by Cormac McCarthy
The Road by Cormac McCarthy: Read it.
That's pretty much all I have to say.
The Road is a Post-Apocalyptic novel that showcases the opposite of what we see in popular Post-Apocalyptic cinema: love, sympathy, empathy, trust... and other things. It follows a father and his young son, who are trying to survive on little more than love and two bullets. I am used to seeing gun battles and dramatic fights for oil or water after the Apocalypse. That's not to say that the father and son don't worry about having oil and water; they definitely do, but that isn't what drives them. They are "each the other's world entire" (6) and they are carrying the fire.
Some people don't distinguish between Post-Apocalyptic and Dystopian books or films. I think you have to: in Dystopian literature, the most alarming thing is how the government is lying to you and definitely not behaving in your best interest (1984, Soylent Green, Brave New World).
In Post-Apocalyptic literature, the most alarming thing is anarchy. There is no government to help you out; sometimes people work together towards the common good, and sometimes they don't (Mad Max series, Steel Dawn). The Road is very much in the same vein. Something catastrophic happened; the Earth became hot with melted asphalt, and is now freezing with ashy snow. Few people are now living, as most people, if they didn't die in the catastrophe, likely starved. Or, you know, were cannabalized.
This book is short, so there is no reason to avoid reading it. I will leave you with just one excerpt and no analysis (196):
P.P.S. Nick Cave did the music for aforementioned movie... sweet!
P.P.P.S. Just linking to Steel Dawn, I noticed that IMDb users give it an average score of 4.2 of 10. I think it was much better than that! I would have to watch it again to accurately score it. If one says it's a Mad Max rip-off, then, OK, at least it's a decent rip-off.
That's pretty much all I have to say.
The Road is a Post-Apocalyptic novel that showcases the opposite of what we see in popular Post-Apocalyptic cinema: love, sympathy, empathy, trust... and other things. It follows a father and his young son, who are trying to survive on little more than love and two bullets. I am used to seeing gun battles and dramatic fights for oil or water after the Apocalypse. That's not to say that the father and son don't worry about having oil and water; they definitely do, but that isn't what drives them. They are "each the other's world entire" (6) and they are carrying the fire.
Some people don't distinguish between Post-Apocalyptic and Dystopian books or films. I think you have to: in Dystopian literature, the most alarming thing is how the government is lying to you and definitely not behaving in your best interest (1984, Soylent Green, Brave New World).
In Post-Apocalyptic literature, the most alarming thing is anarchy. There is no government to help you out; sometimes people work together towards the common good, and sometimes they don't (Mad Max series, Steel Dawn). The Road is very much in the same vein. Something catastrophic happened; the Earth became hot with melted asphalt, and is now freezing with ashy snow. Few people are now living, as most people, if they didn't die in the catastrophe, likely starved. Or, you know, were cannabalized.
This book is short, so there is no reason to avoid reading it. I will leave you with just one excerpt and no analysis (196):
Do you think that your fathers are watching? That they weigh you in their ledgerbook? Against what? There is no book and your fathers are dead in the ground.P.S. Viggo Mortensen stars in the movie adaptation, which should be released Nov. 26, 2008. Perfect Thanksgiving movie? Huh.
P.P.S. Nick Cave did the music for aforementioned movie... sweet!
P.P.P.S. Just linking to Steel Dawn, I noticed that IMDb users give it an average score of 4.2 of 10. I think it was much better than that! I would have to watch it again to accurately score it. If one says it's a Mad Max rip-off, then, OK, at least it's a decent rip-off.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds: Portland, Oregon, 09/22/2008
Monday was Nick Cave's birthday. He turned an ancient 51. He and
The Bad Seeds played a sold-out show at the Crystal Ballroom, which holds at most 1500 people.
So, how was the show? Great. I have a history of being let down by musicians I adore. Last year I finally saw the Smashing Pumpkins after loving them for 12 years... And was bored by Billy's wandering into neo-jam band territory. Ugh. A few years back I saw Bowie, and it was just OK as well; it was a decent performance, but it wasn't engaging thanks to the massiveness of The Rose Garden and the elder age of the audience.
Back to seeing the subjects of my adoration perform... Nick and the
Seeds were great! Nick may be getting up there (he said it was his "fucking birthday" and he was "disgracefully old" and then played "The Weeping Song"), but damn he still delivers. It's a combination of that moustache, that dancing, and that screaming and staggering!
They played a lot off the latest album Dig! Lazarus! Dig! and a hearty dose of classics too. Here's the setlist:
Night of the Lotus Eaters
Dig Lazarus Dig
Tupelo
Today's Lesson
Weeping Song
Nobody's Baby Now
Midnight Man
Mercy Seat
Deanna
Moonland
Red Right Hand
We Call Upon the Author
Papa Won't Leave You, Henry
More News From Nowhere
Love Letter
Lyre of Orpheus
Get Ready For Love
Hard-on For Love
Stagger Lee
I wasn't disappointed by the live spin put on these songs (as I was when I saw the Pumpkins...) It really felt like Nick and Co. were performing for us, not just the paycheck.
My review: Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds put on a damn good show and I highly recommend seeing them! Just make sure to buy your tickets early.
I stumbled upon a few videos the band released before Lazarus came out. The record label posted a series of these promos. But, I admit, I have a special place in my heart for this sort of thing, as my final project for a Digital Photography class had a similar spirit to it (Ha!Ha!).
The Bad Seeds played a sold-out show at the Crystal Ballroom, which holds at most 1500 people.
So, how was the show? Great. I have a history of being let down by musicians I adore. Last year I finally saw the Smashing Pumpkins after loving them for 12 years... And was bored by Billy's wandering into neo-jam band territory. Ugh. A few years back I saw Bowie, and it was just OK as well; it was a decent performance, but it wasn't engaging thanks to the massiveness of The Rose Garden and the elder age of the audience.
Back to seeing the subjects of my adoration perform... Nick and the
Seeds were great! Nick may be getting up there (he said it was his "fucking birthday" and he was "disgracefully old" and then played "The Weeping Song"), but damn he still delivers. It's a combination of that moustache, that dancing, and that screaming and staggering!
They played a lot off the latest album Dig! Lazarus! Dig! and a hearty dose of classics too. Here's the setlist:
Night of the Lotus Eaters
Dig Lazarus Dig
Tupelo
Today's Lesson
Weeping Song
Nobody's Baby Now
Midnight Man
Mercy Seat
Deanna
Moonland
Red Right Hand
We Call Upon the Author
Papa Won't Leave You, Henry
More News From Nowhere
Love Letter
Lyre of Orpheus
Get Ready For Love
Hard-on For Love
Stagger Lee
I wasn't disappointed by the live spin put on these songs (as I was when I saw the Pumpkins...) It really felt like Nick and Co. were performing for us, not just the paycheck.
My review: Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds put on a damn good show and I highly recommend seeing them! Just make sure to buy your tickets early.
I stumbled upon a few videos the band released before Lazarus came out. The record label posted a series of these promos. But, I admit, I have a special place in my heart for this sort of thing, as my final project for a Digital Photography class had a similar spirit to it (Ha!Ha!).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
