I’m the real deal here

I’m comin’ to clear

Yo bloggin trolls

Outta tha holes!

Hit it!

zk zk pzk pzk pvzkpkzvpvzk kkkkkk bsch


22 thoughts on “Schach-D

  1. This demonstrates the importance of having some history on a person, so that you know what is, for them, an unfortunate aberration.

    It also demonstrates the importance of a person staying true to their own originality, and not falling prey to producing what everyone else has or is doing.

    We can also imagine that it demonstrates the importance of artists having agents.

    \Dave: I came up with something that’s definitely gonna have mass, popular appeal.

    Agent: Definitely not, Dave. Analogously speaking, there is funny, and then there is Weird Al Yankovic. Do you want to be taken serious, Dave?

    Dave: Definitely. I most definitely want my art to be taken serious.

    Agent: Then for you, Dave, your shtick is the “intellectual artist”. Stick with that, because it’s more than just a shtick. As far as old skool beat box rap, before and after making it big, you’ll talk about how all that influenced your art, but, in public, you never, ever, ever do any of that, because, again, analogously speaking, it would turn their perception of you into a Weird Al. Do you hear where I’m coming from, Dave?

    Dave: Dude, I hear you, but I really like that beat box rap. zk zk pzk pzk pvzkpkzvpvzk kkkkkk bsch.

    (Further comments will be taken to that other post, where real intellectual discussion can be taken part in, because of the inspiring presence of Real and True Art.)

  2. This is what I imagine it would be like if I were to take the stage under the impression I could rap. Kind of like when I was 14 and thought I could dance.

  3. Imagination is important in giving us ambition. One imagination leads to another, where each imagination could be the one that finally leads us to produce something that has popular appeal. But maybe not. Even probably not.

    But it’s not 100% because there’s only so much room at the top. Healthy people, even if “weird”, aren’t willing to do anything to make it. Consciously or not, we look at other people, and we say, “Is this what you have to to do make it? No thanks. Getting others to listen to me, because I’m willing to give others a little platform of their own to talk stupidity, trash, and filth, is very undesirable, even when experienced in a very small way.”

    I still have a comment to make at that other post. I’ll try to stick with a fixed, fake email address. For several years now, my comments on blogs have usually been infrequent and one-shot deals, and my general rule has been to never use a real email address in the email field, and not use the same fake email address for multiple comments, unless I happen to want to, and can remember what email address I used previously, which I usually can’t, because, up front, I usually don’t want it to be more than a one-shot deal.

    It’s my little way of not submitting to the rule of the blogger any more than I have to.

    • Consciously or not, we look at other people, and we say, “Is this what you have to to do make it? No thanks. Getting others to listen to me, because I’m willing to give others a little platform of their own to talk stupidity, trash, and filth, is very undesirable, even when experienced in a very small way.”

      This is why I didn’t pursue a career as a writer, journalist, or corporate book editor. I never thought of being a poet as a career, only as an artistic identity. Right now, I think of being a musician as my artistic identity.

  4. You need to switch your “identity thinking” from musician to “producer of music”. Performances are almost exclusively a momentary event. Publishing is a historical event that leaves behind something concrete that can be remembered for many, many years, if people have an interest in remembering it.

    William Blake comes to mind, a poet who was not overly concerned with getting a following. At least I think that’s what I remember from the “Norton’s Anthology of English Literature”.

    But “producer of music identity” is related to what I have to cover at that other post. It’s a technical discussion. It can take work to get technical, so I put it off.

    • I recently read up on Blake because I encountered a reference to his theology. He was mostly concerned with making a living as an engraver and with doing his art (visual and poetic) with as much integrity as possible. So, even though his ideas were quite bizarre, they survive today in visual, poetic, philosophical, and religious form because he was technically adept and compelling in his portrayals (the compelling part coming from the fact that he totally believed in them).

      I have probably more of a stake in graphic design work that in music, to be fair. But I have little education or success in either, and no cultivated appreciation of them. Partly that is due to a perverse tendency of mine, that when I decide to pursue something, I do it despite persistent failure and inattentiveness; and something that I really obsess about, I avoid pursuing or promoting systematically. This is a character flaw that I just recently began analyzing, and I associate it with anxiety, ironic detachment, feebleness, and indecision.

      I tell you, I would rather be a swineherd, understood by the swine, than a poet misunderstood by men.

      Kierkegaard, Either/Or, p. 19 (Doubleday Anchor, 1944)

      Go ahead whenever you’re ready. I don’t have a need to be sympathized with and I do have a willingness to see my equation written out.

  5. That’s a great picture; it even looks like you. And if you can’t resist the temptation to periodically rap at open-mike night at some coffee house, the picture visually captures what could be your schtick.

    Basically, you would sort of be taking the schtick from the Talking Heads front-man, also named David, and take it to the extreme, without the bouncing around, as I explain.

    You would stand there completely motionless, with slightly slumped shoulders, with an expressionless, unsmiling, emotionless, mannequin look on your face, somehow doing an excellent rap all the while, and never acknowledging the presence of any other human being.

    It’s the “take it to the next level of extreme” method, which has worked for many artists.

    There’s no need to get massive tattoos and piercings, and that’s become the norm anyway.

    You could present yourself as a homosexual with massive tattoos and piercings, since that gimmick hasn’t totally panned itself out, but you’re already established that you’re not willing to do anything to make it.

    The picture is your tutor. Seek to consistently capture the essence of the picture by practicing in front of a mirror, and then, it’s showtime, dude, showtime.

    Better yet, practice in front of your family, because they will give you an honest opinion of whether you’ve achieved “the look”.

    They’ll love it. They’ll support you all the way to the top, during your long journey to the top, and they’ll be your biggest fans, all the way up, and then all the way back down to where MC Hammer is today, unless you never leave the realm of where MC Hammer is today.

    This brings up the topic of you needing to be versatile, and to be able to make changes on an as need basis. If the top is stubbornly resisting you, you might want to make a small change to your routine, like wear some baggy looking pajama pants. It worked for MC Hammer, we know that for sure, until it stopped working, but that’s just an example anyway. Only you will be able to determine what shallow, superficial, purely commercially oriented changes you need to make to get results, without compromising your integrity in shallow, superficial, purely commercially oriented ways.

  6. A fascinating discussion is worth comment. I do think that you ought to publish more on this issue, it may not be a taboo matter but usually people don’t speak about such subjects. To the next! Kind regards!!

  7. Any allegory would be a result of the law of unintentional consequences. Whatever application there would be, it would have to be the negation of something I said.

    Sunday’s coming, and I’ve set a deadline for making a comment on that other post. It should be very anticlimactic.

    The Internet is a mystery. I could mention the comment above, but a much better one is the one by Ahmedar at that targeted post.

    It’s like a work of art. It starts out as if it might have meaning for the first 22 words, then, with “you command”, it doesn’t put together a two-word phrase that means anything.

    So I think to myself, if this is a fake comment by Dave, then it’s funny. If it’s a fake comment by a friend of Dave, then it’s funny. But, if it’s a spam comment, I have to wonder what’s going on out there in the world. Is there an amateur who’s working on an algorithm to post spam comments that are supposed to sound believable, and he’s not even close, because he’s a total amateur at that kind of thing?

    I can’t remember if WordPress allows you to let someone comment, but yet block the link on their name, because neither of these have links on their name.

  8. Those are spam comments by Amedar and Melodious Whale Chick (I changed the name because her name advertised her product). I thought they were funny, so I kept the text but deleted the links and email addresses, so that Akismet wouldn’t let them bypass moderation. WordPress, for good or ill, allows one to edit everything about a comment.

    For all anyone else knows, you could be a fake commenter, and this dialogue could be the product of a psychopathic disturbance on my part.

  9. So there are lots of interesting tangents we could go on here about how people conduct themselves on the web.

    1) Though people could many times impersonate others to spread disinformation, most people don’t. Why? Because they don’t want to.

    2) We do things on the Internet that are reasonably innocent, but it would have been better if we wouldn’t have done them, because the public nature of the Internet changes the dynamics, along with search engines and stuff staying on the Internet for a long time. All this to say that if we don’t do certain things, other people don’t have to address certain possible scenarios, at best, and others won’t have something innocent in nature to exploit, at worst.

    Item (2) is just a result of only getting to live once. Who is infinitely wise, and has the ability to think out every possible decision to its proper conclusion?

    For me, if someone set things up right, then I could be fooled, but if Commenter X says something that I would like to hypothetically use as ammo against Person X, if I can’t verify that Commenter X is Person X, then I don’t put any stock in what Commenter X is saying.

    It was like this (speaking in present tense):
    1) That comment by Amedar interests me. Is this intentional humor, or is it an accident? I will ponder this to see if I can figure it out logically.
    2) Is this Dave’s kind of humor?
    3) It could be called “Dave’s kind of humor”.
    4) Then is it a fake comment by Dave?
    5) I do know that Dave posted a fake comment on his blog once, though I can only think of one time, and it was recent.
    6) Does this fit the profile of the one time I remember Dave putting up a fake comment.
    7) No. Dave made it obvious that it was a fake comment by using a name like “Fake Commenter”.
    8) So it wasn’t Dave.
    9) Was it made by a friend of Dave?…

  10. Ahmedar still being on my mind, in a more perfect world, I would have just said, “Dave, that Ahmedar comment is so funny. Did you do that?”

    And you would say, “No, what that is…”, and then you say something pretty close to what you said up above.

    And then I would talk a lot about how the Internet is a mysterious place, sort of like I did above, maybe saying more, or maybe less, probably saying more, though I now remember that this is supposed to be about a more perfect world, which might require I say more, or might require I say less, I would have to think about which would be better. On the surface, it would appear I should say less in a more perfect world, but if there were infinite time available, I don’t know that it would make any difference.

    And in a more perfect world, that would be the end of it. And does represent what was sort of the end of it, until it opened back up, because in a less perfect world, we don’t know if people are making something big out of something that should be little.

    And that’s not completely a bad thing in a less perfect world, because in a less perfect world, for various reasons, not all bad, we don’t want people to know everything we’re thinking.

  11. BTW, “Schach” is the German word for “chess” — “Schach-D” rhymes with “Shock-G”.

    Sprechen Sie Deutsch hier, Baby!

    [Beck, “Loser”]

Instigate some pointless rambling

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s